9/11 Stop Terror Kill Terrorists
PAPADOC
them each day for the last 365 days. I remember the little girl my
daughters age who was flying with her mom and I imagine the terror
that must have gone thru her when those towel headed motherfuckers
told her she was gonna die. I suspect that I will continue to remember
them for all of my life.
No I dont need a special day to remember. This day for me is to
reaffirm my pledge that we will track those fuckers down and kill each
and every one of them. Leaders, Followers, and backbenchers....all of
them will rue the day that they attacked us thinking we would retreat
as we have since 1983.
Now is the time to wade into them and kill them. Kill them before they
kill us again, kill them so that each succeeding generation has the
penalty for killing us burned into their collective souls. Kill their
leaders and those who use the name of god to subvert Islam, kill those
who hold entire populations hostage to their perverted vision of
Islamic 12th century justice. Free the common man from the hold of
fanatic islamic justice.
This is a pretty radical, but its no more radical than what we said
after the Pearl Harbor attackks. And its actually alot more appropiate
to the enemy we face now. The Japanese in the end were able to
negotiate, these Islamic fanactics only want one thing...our death.
How does one negotiate with that...?
PAPA DOC
Old No.7
Kill as many of these Islamic Fundamentalist "people" as possible.
The Mullahs and Madras's spreading hatred toward us need to become targets.
If the Islamic "Leaders" in countries supporting these murderers do not come
around, then
destroy their "Shrines".
Iran, Syria, and The Kingdom support these murderers, and have paid zero
price for it.
I know, I'm a big meanie....
But they've killed 3,000 of us.
Until they fear and respect us, they will continue to want to attack us.
If they won't fear and respect us, then we simply need to kill them.
They will never like us.
We need to get over any "Politically Correct" desire to
"Understand and Come together" with them.
They are barbarians, who want the world to revert to 1100 AD.
We need to treat them like we did the Japanese from 7 December 1941, to 2
September 1945.
Sorry to be a big meanie, but facts are facts.
- kyle
"Only the dead have seen the end of war"
Plato
"PAPADOC" <PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by> wrote in message
news:3d7f58f1...@news.west.cox.net...
frederickson
"PAPADOC" <PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by> wrote in message
news:3d7f58f1...@news.west.cox.net...
booster
they'ld kill with no remorse, just like you are advocating.
JohnnyChemo
> this is the exact same mentality they use against us.
Not quite. We are responding to the acts of aggression
they have been committing for the last 20 years.
Quentin Stephens
@news.west.cox.net:
> I dont want to remember the fallen on this day...I have remembered
> them each day for the last 365 days. I remember the little girl my
> daughters age who was flying with her mom and I imagine the terror
> that must have gone thru her when those towel headed motherfuckers
> told her she was gonna die.
Ah, but the true evil is that they didn't. As far as the passengers
on the first two flights knew, they were going to be hostages, and
those over Pennsylvania only knew the truth through telephone calls.
Victor
> They will never like us.
> We need to get over any "Politically Correct" desire to
> "Understand and Come together" with them.
> They are barbarians, who want the world to revert to 1100 AD.
>
How ironic you should mention 1100AD. As this isn't far removed form when
the Crusades began. And what were the Crusades? The last attempts of
religious fanatics to destroy a people who didn't believe what they believed
in. For a cause. This time around is was us (the Christians) against them.
I don't think trying to kill them all this time around is going to work any
better than it did back in 1100 AD. The Moslem world's hatred of the West
unfortunately probably started with the Crusades. Not to justify what happen
on 9/11..but it's quite obvious that they don't want the West in their
lands. Personally I say let's get the hell out. They want to revert their
world back to the Middle Ages, what should we care. Of course with all the
oil they got we won't be leaving anytime soon. And we'll deal with countries
who in truth are our enemies as long as oil is involved.
Sorry but violence begets more violence. Doesn't mean we shouldn't punish
those responsible for 9/11..but when will it end. And sorry..I doubt
treating them like we did Japan is really a viable option. Especially if
that implies nuclear weapons. Might have been a good idea when we were the
only ones with the bomb. But I don't want to risk WWIII and Armageddon to
avenge the deaths of 3000 people.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
PAPADOC
started with us going on Crusade...? Did you miss the day in school
where they talked about the Muslim Conquest.
>How ironic you should mention 1100AD. As this isn't far removed form when
>the Crusades began. And what were the Crusades? The last attempts of
>religious fanatics to destroy a people who didn't believe what they believed
>in. For a cause. This time around is was us (the Christians) against them.
The Crusades were the proper response to a muslim invasion.
>
>I don't think trying to kill them all this time around is going to work any
>better than it did back in 1100 AD. The Moslem world's hatred of the West
>unfortunately probably started with the Crusades. Not to justify what happen
>on 9/11..but it's quite obvious that they don't want the West in their
>lands.
You missed the day in school where they explained about the goal of
muslim fanatics..? They will not be satisfied until we are either all
dead or all converted. We are a constant affront even by our very
existance to their belief in God. Always have been always will be.
This is gonna be a fight till the finish between muslim fanatics and
us. Get used to it...appeasement buys you nothing except a knife to
the throat.
>Personally I say let's get the hell out. They want to revert their
>world back to the Middle Ages, what should we care. Of course with all the
>oil they got we won't be leaving anytime soon. And we'll deal with countries
>who in truth are our enemies as long as oil is involved.
That ignores the intelligent people who live in the Middle East who
crave a free society with a secular government. We can deliver that in
much the same way we delivered Japan from the Fuedal Society and
German from the dream of the Reich. The middle easts only hope is to
rid itself of the religious fanatics....and we are uniquely qualified
to help them with that dream. We save ourselves and them as well.
>
>Sorry but violence begets more violence.
Thats an ignorant statement in the face of vast evidence to the
contrary. From the local, where a cop shoots a murderer thereby ending
his violent ways to Germany and Japan being utterly defeated and
reformed by the Allies.
> Doesn't mean we shouldn't punish
>those responsible for 9/11..but when will it end. And sorry..I doubt
>treating them like we did Japan is really a viable option. Especially if
>that implies nuclear weapons. Might have been a good idea when we were the
>only ones with the bomb. But I don't want to risk WWIII and Armageddon to
>avenge the deaths of 3000 people.
Armageddon..? The only way that happens is if we do nothing and madmen
like Saddam aquire vast numbers of delivery vehicle and warheads.
Thankfully we have a President who doesnt believe this is a Law
Enforcement issue but instead views 9/11 as an act of war. Shame on
the terrorists...they vastly underestimated us. And like all who have
managed to that before they will pay with their lives.
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
wont kill us.
>this is the exact same mentality they use against us.
Bullshit....there are vastly different implications if a Murderer
shoots a cop or if a cop shoots a murderer. That you cannot understand
that difference means that our education system has failed you
utterly.
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
feel is of absolutely no value to them. They want me either dead or
converted to their vision of a 12th century heaven.
>well they did want you to feel how they feel. filled and blinded by hate
>they'ld kill with no remorse, just like you are advocating.
This isnt about how I feel...this is completly analogous to how you
are gonna act when you have a large house and a madman is roaming it
trying to kill your family. What are you gonna do sit down and sing
cumbaya or go kill him first?
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
United systems operations center receives word that a flight attendant
from Flight 175 had called and said "Oh my God. The crew has been
killed, a flight attendant has been stabbed. We've been hijacked."
Then the line went dead.
I think that either her or Betty Ong on Flt 11 did call in and
describe the decent into New York.
PAPA DOC
Very3
great. we have this staggering ability to expeirence a serious calamity, be
shocked, and then move on seemingly a couple months later where the event
becomes something old and abstract. on one hand its great how we as a nation
can just shakle off what they throw at us, on the otherhand it assures we never
really get angry enough to demand our country to start not giving a shit about
europeans and start thinnning out the herd of these angry hostile primitive
killers the middle east is full of. do you see how already we are starting to
lose our resolve over iraq?
Very3
> this is the exact same mentality they use against us.
Not quite. We are responding to the acts of aggression
they have been committing for the last 20 years.>>>>
yes. we are always responding rather than going on the offensive. its a losing
strategy.
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Quentin Stephens wrote:
> PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by (PAPADOC) wrote in news:3d7f58f1.34270597
> @news.west.cox.net:
>
> > I dont want to remember the fallen on this day...I have remembered
> > them each day for the last 365 days. I remember the little girl my
> > daughters age who was flying with her mom and I imagine the terror
> > that must have gone thru her when those towel headed motherfuckers
> > told her she was gonna die.
>
> Ah, but the true evil is that they didn't.
Are you kidding? I mean by that, that no serious person can beleive that
folks on those planes were not IN FEAR FOR THIER LIVES.
Regardless of the suggested action (hostage taking), anyone, to include
simpletons (without compassion) like yourself, would be deathly afraid.
With good reason.
Everyone of them knew what was happening, at some point.
DrOk
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
All of these people say it better than I.
___________________________________________
Sept. 11 did wake America up. "The real effect of Sept. 11 is that
American patience and tolerance for its global critics, most of whom
do rather well out of America's benign hegemony, seems just about
exhausted," writes United Press International's Martin Walker. Or, as
Victor Davis Hanson puts it:
As the months progressed the problems inherent in "the European way"
became all too apparent: pretentious utopian manifestos in lieu of
military resoluteness, abstract moralizing to excuse dereliction of
concrete ethical responsibility, and constant American ankle-biting
even as Europe lives in a make-believe Shire while we keep back the
forces of Mordor from its picturesque borders, with only a few brave
Frodos and Bilbos tagging along. Nothing has proved more sobering to
Americans than the skepticism of these blinkered European hobbits
after September 11.
_____________________________________________________
PAPA DOC
>Finally a voice of reason. You hit it right on the nail! While everybody
>else will scream "let's kill ragheads!", you and I both know that we would
>not be in this mess had we not given the Jews weapons and money and had we
>simply stayed out of it. I also find it amusing that most of the "let's
>kill raghead" types have never served in the military. Let's think about
>that.
>
>So where is our big reward for saving Kuwait's ass? How are gas prices? Is
>there a new pro-American democracy in Kuwait instead of a dictatorship? Do
>I need to answer that? No...
>
>Sorry for being an a$$ but IMO it's time that WE as a country and a people
>start pulling our heads out of our asses and start telling our polititions
>what we really want. If we had done that to begin with twenty or so years
>ago there would never had been a 9/11 or any other terrorist actions taken
>against us in the first place by muslims.
>
>
>"Victor" <vbuttaro@nyc.[remove this]rr.com> wrote in message
>news:3d7f9...@corp-goliath.newsgroups.com...
Chuck C.
news:pjOf9.438937$q53.15...@twister.austin.rr.com:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> Finally a voice of reason. You hit it right on the nail! While
> everybody else will scream "let's kill ragheads!", you and I both know
> that we would not be in this mess had we not given the Jews weapons
> and money and had we simply stayed out of it. I also find it amusing
> that most of the "let's kill raghead" types have never served in the
> military. Let's think about that.
The Jews, LOL, ok we see your point of view. Here's a question, why
aint Isreal the "Great Satan" instead of us if thats really it? Even
OBL didn't mention Isreal until he needed the support of the
Palistinians
>
> So where is our big reward for saving Kuwait's ass? How are gas
> prices? Is there a new pro-American democracy in Kuwait instead of a
> dictatorship? Do I need to answer that? No...
Agree about democracy, but gas prices are not significantly increased if
at all. Somehow, I bet we'll be using Kuwait as a staging ground very
soon.
>
> Sorry for being an a$$ but IMO it's time that WE as a country and a
> people start pulling our heads out of our asses and start telling our
> polititions what we really want. If we had done that to begin with
> twenty or so years ago there would never had been a 9/11 or any other
> terrorist actions taken against us in the first place by muslims.
>
I'll be telling mine to pull there ass out and make sure this don't
happen again. That means that if you wish for harm to my country, We'll
hit you first. Sorry, we dont have the luxury of trying to
"understand" them anymore. But I'll bite, what should we have done 20
years ago???
I also love these "X-No-Archive: yes" people. Nothing like standing up
for what you believe in.
Chuck
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
Benjamin Franklin
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
victory anymore. We are so arrogant that we believe that we can beat a
person about the head and shoulders just a bit to show them how tough
we are then they will back down. Or worse we can talk shit and that
will scare the death out of them.
This policy stems from the Poser Mentality we as a nation have
adopted. A problem rises though when we think everyone will play the
same game and they just wont. For some the end of a fight is when one
or both of the opponents are dead. Thats the sort of fight we are in
now...and all the So Called Alpha Males Politicians are having a tough
time adjusting to the fact that they actually have to back up their
words with deeds.
Luckily for the US we still have alot of the sorts of people who back
up what they say with deeds. We saw that in the bravery and honor of
those firemen that went up to certain death in the WTC, we saw that in
the passengers who fought back and killed those towel headed
motherfuckers, and we see that in all of the services engaged in
defending this great nation.
PAPA DOC
Chris Townsend
help but wonder why you think Victor went to school at all.
"PAPADOC" <PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by> wrote in message
news:3d7fad51...@news.west.cox.net...
Very3
victory anymore. We are so arrogant that we believe that we can beat a
person about the head and shoulders just a bit to show them how tough
we are then they will back down. Or worse we can talk shit and that
will scare the death out of them. >>>>
yeah, but actually i think it goes deeper, I feel the military has this
mindframe that every war is a potential vietnam.so they do everything piecemeal
and cautious. we fight with the thinking we cant win big and that the public is
just about to protest.
those first few weeks of afganistan I was really proud as I saw those huge
mountains shake with the bombs of B-52's. the fierce taliban, the ones all
those arab countries were acting like were supermen who destroyed superpowers
got shattered by bombs as primitive as they are. if one we were so heavy handed
and sure with all those who blow up our embassys and soldiers maybe some stuff
wouldnt have happened.
Chuck C.
news:hMXf9.258059$Yd.10...@twister.austin.rr.com:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> Why are there so many dumbass people out there that do not understand
> that "X-No-Archive: yes" protects their privacy?? Has nothing at all
> to do with what I stand for or don't stand for. As far as standing up
> for things, well how about eight years in the military. What have you
> done for your country lately??
>
> Ignorance rules supreme I guess.
>
>> I also love these "X-No-Archive: yes" people. Nothing like standing
>> up for what you believe in.
>
>
>
>
Touchy, Touchy.
How does X-No-Archive protect your privacy any better than just using a
alias and being sensible. My name really is Chuck, I try not to include
too much personal info in messages just so some nutcase cant track me
down, within reason. Of course if they do, my german sheppard LOVES
strangers and theres no trigger lock here.
But, if someone wants to know what I think, I'm not afraid of it being
in Deja (or google now). Thats my point. Of course, most people just
think this is all just wrestling with a pig but I cant resist.
And thanks for your service!
Chuck C.
news:hMXf9.258059$Yd.10...@twister.austin.rr.com:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> Why are there so many dumbass people out there that do not understand
> that "X-No-Archive: yes" protects their privacy?? Has nothing at all
> to do with what I stand for or don't stand for. As far as standing up
> for things, well how about eight years in the military. What have you
> done for your country lately??
>
> Ignorance rules supreme I guess.
>
>> I also love these "X-No-Archive: yes" people. Nothing like standing
>> up for what you believe in.
>
>
>
Oh, and nice job ignoring the other points!!!
Chris Townsend
out into the lobby where he meets President Bush. They shake hands and as
they walk the Saudi says, "You know, I have just one question about what I
have seen in America."
President Bush says "Well your Excellency, anything I can do to help you, I
will do.
The Saudi whispers "My son watches this show 'Star Trek' and in it there are
Russians, and Blacks, and Asians, but never any Arabs. He is very upset. He
doesn't understand why there are never any Arabs in Star Trek."
President Bush laughs and leans toward the Saudi, and whispers back, "It's
because it takes place in the future...."
"PAPADOC" <PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by> wrote in message
news:3d7f58f1...@news.west.cox.net...
Ivan Jozic
"JohnnyChemo" <johnn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ARMf9.456$Zi.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
> frederickson wrote:
> > this is the exact same mentality they use against us.
>
> Not quite. We are responding to the acts of aggression
> they have been committing for the last 20 years.
>
No, they are responding for 60 years of aggression Israel has been doing on
Palestinians and Lebanese.. I mean, if you were living in some camp, forced
to move around all the time, not enough food and stuff and every now and
then harrassed by Israeli troops? USA gave the Israel weapons, but that's
not of primary concern.. The concern is of the constant support Israel has
from the US whatever they do and UN cannot force any resolution on Israel
because of the US support..
Fuck, it's about time people in US understand that it is also their fucking
business what their leadership does or does not around the world..
Examples are numerous..
E.g. Saddam Hussein.. US got him there, US had the chance to put him away in
1990, but no.. They let him stay as an excuse to bring more troops in to
"increase stability" in the region but actually to protect oil.. I can live
with that. BUT, apart from organising mutinies of Kurds and Iraquis against
Saddam and then backing out on them (thousands have been killed for sure),
US also forced economical sanctions on Iraq (which for instance prevented
humanitarian aid cargos to reach Iraq) so they lack food, medical supplies..
People live in disastrous conditions becase of the sanctions and Saddam's
regime but US government don't give a fuck (it's their fault). An average US
citizen also doesn't care; can't say that it prevents me to sleep either..
BUT, these people are deperate and they want revenge..
I have to say PAPADOC is a complete arse because he can't make any
conclusions other than kill, kill, kill..
In which way does he differ from the small fanatical portion of muslim
population, part of which had involved in the last attack?
Ivan Jozic
> The Crusades were the proper response to a muslim invasion.
>
Invasion?
Go back to school..
Was it Europeans who invaded America? And how did they get to Europe? Oh,
yes.. The Germans and Slavics invaded The Roman Empire.. Etc.
The crusades were meant to drive the Muslims out of Jerusalem as it was a
sacred place.. And so they did after which it stopped to be that and turned
into the pillaging and robbing of everything..
As an example take the 4th crusade.. They didn't have boats so as a favour
to Venice for giving them a lift to Turkey, they pillaged a town of Zadar
which resisted to Venice. Then they reached Konstantinopol (Istanbul),
pillaged it and decided they had enough and returned back to Europe..
Fuck, the Muslims defeated the 1st Crusade because the leaders were so
greedy that they divided themselves in order to get more land and loot..
Crusades a proper response? Your knowledge of history is ridiculous as is
your way of thinking to solve these crisis and issues.. One year after the
event and your thinking hasn't changed a bit.. Sad.
Dr Oddness Killtroll
The first war between Isam and Christianity occured when Isalm invaded Spain,
and moved North into France, to withing 100 miles of Paris.
Ever heard of the Moors?
This occurred 100 years before the first Christian Crusade into the ME.
Read a book.
DrOk
PAPADOC
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
Spain...a tour bus?
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
aggression? When Israel asked the Palestinians to stay in Hebron in 46
and that they would be protected and the Palestinians decided instead
to throw their lot in with killing all Israelis thats Israeli
aggression?
>
>No, they are responding for 60 years of aggression Israel has been doing on
>Palestinians and Lebanese..
Lebanon was fine until Syria decided it would be a good place to base
its army and to house the various types of Towel Headed Terrorists.
> I mean, if you were living in some camp, forced
>to move around all the time, not enough food and stuff and every now and
>then harrassed by Israeli troops? USA gave the Israel weapons, but that's
>not of primary concern..
Actually the French and Russians gave alot of weapons to Israel at
first.
> The concern is of the constant support Israel has
>from the US whatever they do and UN cannot force any resolution on Israel
>because of the US support..
The UN is corrupt and almost useless. That fact is evident in the
election of LIbya to the Chair of the Human Rights commission.
>Fuck, it's about time people in US understand that it is also their fucking
>business what their leadership does or does not around the world..
The problem you have is that we do indeed know its out business and we
also realize that Europeans are irrelevent in that business. We either
defend ourselves or die.
>I have to say PAPADOC is a complete arse because he can't make any
>conclusions other than kill, kill, kill..
Yup kill kill kill...damn straight. When someone is in my house
killing my Family my response isnt to feel his pain or understand his
problems. Its to kill him and to kill everyone that was involved in
his support.
>In which way does he differ from the small fanatical portion of muslim
>population, part of which had involved in the last attack?
In the same way that a Cop who shoots and kills a murderer is
different from the murderer that shoots and kills innocents. Is that
too complex a thought for someone so elite...?
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
PAPA DOC
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Gonzo wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> Finally a voice of reason. You hit it right on the nail! While everybody
> else will scream "let's kill ragheads!"
Who's screaming that? Really, who is?
> , you and I both know that we would
> not be in this mess had we not given the Jews weapons and money and had we
> simply stayed out of it.
So, taking care of the underdog, the victims of the ho.locaust, is no longer an
admirable action? Funny, we all thought so in '45.
> I also find it amusing that most of the "let's
> kill raghead" types have never served in the military. Let's think about
> that.
13 years.
> So where is our big reward for saving Kuwait's ass? How are gas prices? Is
> there a new pro-American democracy in Kuwait instead of a dictatorship? Do
> I need to answer that?
No.
> No...
But you did.
So, your argument is that, since we did as we've been compelled, by the idiocy
of the '70s', and early '80's (can you say 'Boland'?), and NOT intervened in the
governance of these countries (except in Panama, to a degree), and NOT
coompelled them to conform to democratic principles, then its not worth it to
persue our own interests?
Theres a lesson here, but its not the one the liberals want to hear. We've
obviously not been involved enough in compelling states to a
democratic-captialist form, or enforcing a Pax-Americana.
We should be doing both, much more vigourously. A serious dicussion of these
problems isnt easy to persue in this forum, but, ask yourself, what IS a
super-power?
What does a Super Power
> Sorry for being an a$$ but IMO it's time that WE as a country and a people
> start pulling our heads out of our asses and start telling our polititions
> what we really want.
What do you think we 'want'?
> If we had done that to begin with twenty or so years
> ago there would never had been a 9/11 or any other terrorist actions taken
> against us in the first place by muslims.
Really? If we had not supported Israel, then this would not have happened?
How do you expalin nearly 2 decades of strife in Lebanon, between Sunni, Shia,
and Marionite? And dont say its Isreals fault, because it is not.
The Islamic world is backwards, poorly led, and damn jealous of the west. Its an
old story.
The problems there originate within those nations (NOT Isreal-Pal), and they'd
exist regardless of our stance. Even if Israel did not exist. It would be nice
to remove that excuse, tho..
DrOk
>
>
> "Victor" <vbuttaro@nyc.[remove this]rr.com> wrote in message
> news:3d7f9...@corp-goliath.newsgroups.com...
> >
> >
> >
Quentin Stephens
news:3D7FBF57...@annex.annex:
>
>
> Quentin Stephens wrote:
>
>> PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by (PAPADOC) wrote in
>> news:3d7f58f1.34270597 @news.west.cox.net:
>>
>> > I dont want to remember the fallen on this day...I have
>> > remembered them each day for the last 365 days. I remember
>> > the little girl my daughters age who was flying with her mom
>> > and I imagine the terror that must have gone thru her when
>> > those towel headed motherfuckers told her she was gonna die.
>>
>> Ah, but the true evil is that they didn't.
>
> Are you kidding? I mean by that, that no serious person can
> beleive that folks on those planes were not IN FEAR FOR THIER
> LIVES.
How many hostages died before Sept 11 2001? Very few. How often did
they die? Seldom. Those onboard those first two planes, and
possibly the one that flew into the Pentagon, particularly the
pilots, would have had every expectation that this was a 'normal'
hijacking.
PAPADOC
are incorrect in your assumption. Though I understand your logic. This
time around though the Terrorists killed right from the beginning
which would have alerted most sane people that this was unlike most
hijackings. As well the terrorists did announce according to a phone
call that I remember that they were indeed planning on killing
everyone. I remember this occuring on Flt 175 but cannot find the
reference again.
As you state up until 9/11 most hijackings did not result in death.
The big difference this time was the hijackers started killing people
as soon as they rose up from their seats. Killing the flight crew was
also unique....plenty of clues. Sadly hindsight is 20/20.
Course the little girl Im thinking about would have seen all of this
and anyone who thinks this wouldnt have terrified her doesnt have
little girls.
PAPA DOC
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Quentin Stephens wrote:
> Dr Oddness Killtroll <an...@annex.annex> wrote in
> news:3D7FBF57...@annex.annex:
>
> >
> >
> > Quentin Stephens wrote:
> >
> >> PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by (PAPADOC) wrote in
> >> news:3d7f58f1.34270597 @news.west.cox.net:
> >>
> >> > I dont want to remember the fallen on this day...I have
> >> > remembered them each day for the last 365 days. I remember
> >> > the little girl my daughters age who was flying with her mom
> >> > and I imagine the terror that must have gone thru her when
> >> > those towel headed motherfuckers told her she was gonna die.
> >>
> >> Ah, but the true evil is that they didn't.
> >
> > Are you kidding? I mean by that, that no serious person can
> > beleive that folks on those planes were not IN FEAR FOR THIER
> > LIVES.
>
> How many hostages died before Sept 11 2001?
Look, you seem to be suggesting that killing innocents is something new
in the Islamist pursuit of thier (nebulous) aims and goals. That belies
the fact of Munich, 30 years ago.
You do remember the '72 Olympics, no?
> Very few. How often did
> they die? Seldom. Those onboard those first two planes, and
> possibly the one that flew into the Pentagon, particularly the
> pilots, would have had every expectation that this was a 'normal'
> hijacking.
And the muslim on muslim killings, between shia, sunni, hashemite and
non-hasemite(in Leb and Iraq-Iran, Algeria, Morroco, ad infinatum), the
hate between muslim and hindu, in Pak-India-Kash, doesnt suggest that
dieing at the hands of an Islamic terrorist is a likelyhood?
How about Entebbe? Were the PFLP kidding? They did kill one elderly
lady. Fortunately, they mostly got dead, thanks to Bibi and co, before
more were killed.
Not that that is the issue at all. You contend that most of the people
did not fear for thier lives.
How would you know this, and furthermore, what is the value of this
observation?
Additionally, when one is involved in potentially life threatening
situation, you ALWAYS know it.
If you ever had, then, you'd understand.
This aint science (above), its experience talking...
When you're screaming through the air, at 400kts, below the NYC skyline,
you know whats going to happen.
DrOk
Lord Data
> Ivan,
>
> The first war between Isam and Christianity occured when Isalm invaded Spain,
> and moved North into France, to withing 100 miles of Paris.
>
You are probably referring to the battle of Poitiers which is completely
unconnected with the invasion of Spain which happenend for very
different reasons. Here is a quote for you taken from the Britannica
encyclopedia.
"The invasion of Spain was the result both of a Muslim readiness to
invade and of a call for assistance by one of the Visigothic factions,
the “Witizans.” Having become dispossessed after the death of King
Witiza in 710, they appealed to Musa for support against the usurper
Roderick (see above). In April or May of 711 Musa sent a Berber army
headed by Tariq ibn Ziyad across the passage whose modern name, the
Strait of Gibraltar, derives from “Tariq”; in July they were able to
defeat Roderick in a decisive battle at an uncertain location."
I take it that when you refer to "Islam invading Spain", you refer to
Berbers. Although Muslims, Berbers and Ottomans had little in common for
instance except for a "common" religion, it's a bit like saying that
protestants and catholics are the same thing. Might not matter to you
but it does to them.
> Ever heard of the Moors?
Oh yes, let's talk about the Moors. I'm Spanish by the way, so I know
two or three things about them. Here is a definition for you taken again
from the Britannica enyclopedia.
"in English usage, a Moroccan or, formerly, a member of the Muslim
population of Spain, of mixed Arab, Spanish, and Berber origins, who
created the Arab Andalusian civilization and subsequently settled as
refugees in North Africa between the 11th and 17th centuries."
So Moors are as Spanish as the descendents of the European Settlers in
America (That would be you if you're American).
Let's also not forget that the Moors made great advances in Science and
left us with wonderful architectural remains (ever heard of the
Alhambra?). We're talking about a civilization that prospered for more
than half a century and where Muslims, Jews and Christians co-existed
peacefully.
> Read a book.
I would suggest you start reading one yourself and come back once you'll
have something useful to say. It's never too late too learn and you
might even surpass the idiot that is running the US.
You rule Ivan!
Lord Data
s...@stq.gro.uk.invalid says...
>
> Ah, but the true evil is that they didn't. As far as the passengers
> on the first two flights knew, they were going to be hostages, and
> those over Pennsylvania only knew the truth through telephone calls.
>
I do think he has a point here. If you're stuck in a plane full of
hijackers, I doubt you would feel alright. You would fear for your life,
regardless of the outcome.
Lord Data
PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by says...
The problem with you reasoning (or lack of it) is this:
Muslims = bad
kill kill kill
replace that by:
Jews = bad
kill kill kill
Rings any bells?
It's reasonings (or lack of it) like yours that make it possible for a
single man to seal the fate of millions of innocent lives (think
Germany, around 36-45 and a guy with a moustache).
JohnnyChemo
>
> Muslims = bad
> kill kill kill
>
> replace that by:
>
> Jews = bad
> kill kill kill
>
> Rings any bells?
>
> It's reasonings (or lack of it) like yours that make it possible for a
> single man to seal the fate of millions of innocent lives (think
> Germany, around 36-45 and a guy with a moustache).
Hmmm.
muslim extremist = terror attacks on America/Americans
jew = ?
The thing that kills me is people like you think its possible to placate
or negotiate with people of this (muslim extremist) mindset. The only
way we can negotiate with them is if we offer to kill ourselves off or
become muslim ourselves. Neither option suits me.
Of course, when the diatribe starts, the word 'extremist' tends to get
left by the wayside. Kinda like Reuters refusing to use the word
'terrorist.' Just not warm and fuzzy enough to make your point.
Very3
on purpose , israel responds and targets the bombers, maybe, MAYBE a few
civilians die and the palestinians call Israel terrorists. the palestinians are
a violent people PERIOD.
dressing their own children in battle gear.
sick sick people. but thankfully israel keeps them in line.
Very3
or negotiate with people of this (muslim extremist) mindset. The only
way we can negotiate with them is if we offer to kill ourselves off or
become muslim ourselves. Neither option suits me.<>>>>>
these are the people who cant seem to decide whether gay people should be run
over by a tank or they should have a wall knocked down on them. a woman who had
sex outside a mariage was buried up to her neck and they throw stones at her
till she dies. these freaks dont need to be understood. thats not me being
racist or a bigot, its me being a realist and hoping we actually end the
primitive rule of the ultimate bigots and racists there are.middle eastern
muslim males.
Lord Data
johnn...@yahoo.com says...
> Hmmm.
> muslim extremist = terror attacks on America/Americans
>
> jew = ?
>
> The thing that kills me is people like you think its possible to placate
> or negotiate with people of this (muslim extremist) mindset. The only
> way we can negotiate with them is if we offer to kill ourselves off or
> become muslim ourselves. Neither option suits me.
>
> Of course, when the diatribe starts, the word 'extremist' tends to get
> left by the wayside. Kinda like Reuters refusing to use the word
> 'terrorist.' Just not warm and fuzzy enough to make your point.
>
>
You misquoted me. The point I was making is that a lot of people seem to
reason in this way:
terrorists = bad
extremists = terrorists
muslims = extremists
muslims = bad
Which is of course completely incorrect. Believe it or not, even
extremists are not all terrorists although all terrorists are generally
extremists. And of course, not all muslims are extremists, far from
that. Just think about all the different currents in Islam. Just think
that by their act, these terrorists who commited these atrocities
commited a sin as far as Islam is concerned. Yes, believe it or not,
even in Muslim countries killing innocent people is frowned upon.
Would you say that because of the Nazis all Germans are bad and should
be eradicated?
PAPADOC
terrorists. Matter of fact I say it would be a good idea to kill their
leaders who are subjecting them to horrible conditions....its the
religous and political leaders that need to die.
PAPA DOC
Quentin Stephens
>
>
> Quentin Stephens wrote:
>
>> Dr Oddness Killtroll <an...@annex.annex> wrote in
>> news:3D7FBF57...@annex.annex:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Quentin Stephens wrote:
>> >
>> >> PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by (PAPADOC) wrote in
>> >> news:3d7f58f1.34270597 @news.west.cox.net:
>> >>
>> >> > I dont want to remember the fallen on this day...I have
>> >> > remembered them each day for the last 365 days. I remember
>> >> > the little girl my daughters age who was flying with her
>> >> > mom and I imagine the terror that must have gone thru her
>> >> > when those towel headed motherfuckers told her she was
>> >> > gonna die.
>> >>
>> >> Ah, but the true evil is that they didn't.
>> >
>> > Are you kidding? I mean by that, that no serious person can
>> > beleive that folks on those planes were not IN FEAR FOR THIER
>> > LIVES.
>>
>> How many hostages died before Sept 11 2001?
>
> Look, you seem to be suggesting that killing innocents is
> something new in the Islamist pursuit of thier (nebulous) aims
> and goals. That belies the fact of Munich, 30 years ago.
So you have to go that far back? I think this demonstrates my
point.
> You do remember the '72 Olympics, no?
I was 5 at the time.
>> Very few. How often did
>> they die? Seldom. Those onboard those first two planes, and
>> possibly the one that flew into the Pentagon, particularly the
>> pilots, would have had every expectation that this was a
>> 'normal' hijacking.
> How about Entebbe? Were the PFLP kidding? They did kill one
> elderly lady. Fortunately, they mostly got dead, thanks to Bibi
> and co, before more were killed.
Again, a very long time ago.
> Not that that is the issue at all. You contend that most of the
> people did not fear for thier lives.
Correct. The release of hostages has usually been used as a
bargaining counter.
> How would you know this, and furthermore, what is the value of
> this observation?
Because I pay attention to foreign news.
> When you're screaming through the air, at 400kts, below the NYC
> skyline, you know whats going to happen.
But until it was too late, they didn't.
Lord Data
In article <3d81117c....@news.west.cox.net>,
PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by says...
> Your point is invalid because I do not equate all muslims with
> terrorists.
I suspected you didn't and that you spoke out of anger and frustration,
but your rhetoric certainly seemed to suggest so. But the truth is that
when emotions replace rational thought, this is how you get a war on a
global scale (a la 39-45).
> Matter of fact I say it would be a good idea to kill their
> leaders who are subjecting them to horrible conditions....its the
> religous and political leaders that need to die.
Again, what makes you think that Muslim leaders are any worse than the
ones you have? A lot of them are crazy, incompetent, corrupt, extremist,
you name, but that doesn't seem to be that much different from America
or Europe?
The real issue here is that we're dealing with terrorists. Full stop.
Now I can tell you that we've had to deal with terrorists for years in
Europe (and still have to unfortunately. Think ETA, IRA, Red Brigads...
These individuals genuinely believe that they are fighting for a good
cause which is what makes them so dangerous. Of course, we all know that
they just make the problem worse and I suspect that killing innocent
people in the name of God, Allah... doesn't really help their
credibility. Still, that doesn't stop them.
Now if we take the example of Spain, what you are proposing is that
Spain should simply bomb the baski country or that the UK should bomb
Ireland in order to get rid of their problem with the IRA. And nobody
should complain about it because they are within their rights. After all
they've been attacked, haven't they? Sounds far fetched? This is what
Bush is proposing when he speaks about attacking Irak.
Surely this is not a solution? Don't you think?
Bruce Rennie
> Gonzo wrote:
>
> > X-No-Archive: yes
> >
> > Finally a voice of reason. You hit it right on the nail! While everybody
> > else will scream "let's kill ragheads!"
>
> Who's screaming that? Really, who is?
>
> > , you and I both know that we would
> > not be in this mess had we not given the Jews weapons and money and had we
> > simply stayed out of it.
>
> So, taking care of the underdog, the victims of the ho.locaust, is no longer an
> admirable action? Funny, we all thought so in '45.
>
The original poster might be interested to know that the US pretty
much did "stay out of it" until the '73 war. Up to that point, Israel
got most of it's weapons from France and Britain. And since the land
that everyone is arguing about was taken in the '67 war, you'd think
France and Britain would attract more criticism wouldn't you? Strange
how that doesn't happen.
/bruce
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
was all about religion so indeed it was perfectly proper to expect
that the Christians would respond to the muslims.
>
>I take it that when you refer to "Islam invading Spain", you refer to
>Berbers. Although Muslims, Berbers and Ottomans had little in common for
>instance except for a "common" religion, it's a bit like saying that
>protestants and catholics are the same thing. Might not matter to you
>but it does to them.
>
>
But its all about religion.
>Let's also not forget that the Moors made great advances in Science and
>left us with wonderful architectural remains (ever heard of the
>Alhambra?). We're talking about a civilization that prospered for more
>than half a century and where Muslims, Jews and Christians co-existed
>peacefully.
Before we go into exactly which muslims had all these wonderful
advances that it be pointed out that just because the Germans invented
a bunch of wonderful technology didnt make the Nazis legitimate.
Furthermore there is certainly alot of room for argument about how
wonderfully they coexisted.
>
>> Read a book.
>
>I would suggest you start reading one yourself and come back once you'll
>have something useful to say. It's never too late too learn and you
>might even surpass the idiot that is running the US.
>
>You rule Ivan!
Yea Yale Grad, Harvard MBA and an idiot. Sheesh dont you people ever
come up with better arguments than to claim that someone is an
idiot...? He has immediatly grasped the nature of our enemy in a way
that no other President has...and he has begun to do something about
it in a fashion that no other of the Poser Presidents ever
did...including his father.
PAPA DOC
Lord Data
says...
> No one said anything about race in the argument for the crusade. It
> was all about religion so indeed it was perfectly proper to expect
> that the Christians would respond to the muslims.
>
> >
> >I take it that when you refer to "Islam invading Spain", you refer to
> >Berbers. Although Muslims, Berbers and Ottomans had little in common for
> >instance except for a "common" religion, it's a bit like saying that
> >protestants and catholics are the same thing. Might not matter to you
> >but it does to them.
> >
> >
>
> But its all about religion.
>
I can't agree here. The reasons for invading Spain were purely
imperialistic, not religious. It just turned out that they both were
from different religions. If you look at the crusades, you'll see that
each party had its own agenda and that religion was just a pretext.
Somehow it seemed more politically correct to say that you did it for
the sake of you faith rather than because you wanted a larger slice of
the pie.
> >Let's also not forget that the Moors made great advances in Science and
> >left us with wonderful architectural remains (ever heard of the
> >Alhambra?). We're talking about a civilization that prospered for more
> >than half a century and where Muslims, Jews and Christians co-existed
> >peacefully.
>
> Before we go into exactly which muslims had all these wonderful
> advances that it be pointed out that just because the Germans invented
> a bunch of wonderful technology didnt make the Nazis legitimate.
>
> Furthermore there is certainly alot of room for argument about how
> wonderfully they coexisted.
>
> >
> >> Read a book.
> >
> >I would suggest you start reading one yourself and come back once you'll
> >have something useful to say. It's never too late too learn and you
> >might even surpass the idiot that is running the US.
> >
> >You rule Ivan!
>
> Yea Yale Grad, Harvard MBA and an idiot. Sheesh dont you people ever
> come up with better arguments than to claim that someone is an
> idiot...? He has immediatly grasped the nature of our enemy in a way
> that no other President has...and he has begun to do something about
> it in a fashion that no other of the Poser Presidents ever
> did...including his father.
Does the fact that you've been to Yale and Harvard really mean anything?
Sure it can't be that bad, but you have to put that in perspective. Youl
find that all these financial scandals were commited by graduates of the
same kind of unis. And you;re of course aware that your beloved
president actually committed fraud too himself. I won't even go into his
other "achievements". Same goes for the vice president. So that wouldn't
make me very confident about my government in the first place.
And the nature of your enemies (ours too for that matter)? Well they are
a group of highly motivated and dangerous individuals that know no law
or boundaries. This is simply not an excuse to attack another country so
you can pretend you're actually doing something about it when you;re
really clueless on what to do.
Of course, I can't really complain as I don;t have to endure that
government, although I quite like Colin Powell. Now there is a man who
looks reasonable.
No.T...@here.com
snipped a bit...
}President Bush laughs and leans toward the Saudi, and whispers back,
}"It's because it takes place in the future...."
LOL!
Avatar
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
the muslims took the holy lands away from the Christians and the
Christians went and took it back. Thats simply turn about....
>
>I can't agree here. The reasons for invading Spain were purely
>imperialistic, not religious. It just turned out that they both were
>from different religions. If you look at the crusades, you'll see that
>each party had its own agenda and that religion was just a pretext.
>Somehow it seemed more politically correct to say that you did it for
>the sake of you faith rather than because you wanted a larger slice of
>the pie.
Given his results so far apparently it does.
>Does the fact that you've been to Yale and Harvard really mean anything?
These days it means far less since curves and not wanting to hurt
someones self esteem mean so much and accomplishments mean so little.
But there was a time not so long ago that a degree from Yale was
indeed an accomplishment. And a Harvard MBA does mean quite alot.
>Sure it can't be that bad, but you have to put that in perspective. Youl
>find that all these financial scandals were commited by graduates of the
>same kind of unis.
You want to put things into perspective then you judge 98% of the
CEO's by the actions of 2%. In general the top management of US
companies are very honorable.
> And you;re of course aware that your beloved
>president actually committed fraud too himself.
Fraud...??? Oh you can sure bring that evidence here and see if it
flies. hehe.
> I won't even go into his
>other "achievements".
I have been nothing but impressed by his conduct of the most pressing
issue for this country. He understands his duties vis a vis the
Scum....kill them.
> Same goes for the vice president. So that wouldn't
>make me very confident about my government in the first place.
See Im very confident about both of them because I know what the story
is...like I said if you feel like bringing your evidence here I would
be delighted.
>
>And the nature of your enemies (ours too for that matter)? Well they are
>a group of highly motivated and dangerous individuals that know no law
>or boundaries. This is simply not an excuse to attack another country so
>you can pretend you're actually doing something about it when you;re
>really clueless on what to do.
Absolutely the linkage between Iraq and Al Queda has been made in a
variety of ways. Defectors, WTC93, Iraq has the capability to produce
the Anthrax, Iraq has the means the motive.
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
>Again, what makes you think that Muslim leaders are any worse than the
>ones you have? A lot of them are crazy, incompetent, corrupt, extremist,
>you name, but that doesn't seem to be that much different from America
>or Europe?
Yea we have guys strapping on bombs all the time and walking into
Cafe's, we have lots of mothers who are so very proud of their
children blowing themselves up taking as many women and children and
fathers as possible, and sheesh just the other day I saw an ad in the
paper for a flight school for all the fanatic Americans who want to go
fly Aircraft into buildings.
Im not answering your question because obviously you arent seriously
saying that Osama and Bush equate to the same result for you and your
mom.
>
>The real issue here is that we're dealing with terrorists. Full stop.
>Now I can tell you that we've had to deal with terrorists for years in
>Europe (and still have to unfortunately. Think ETA, IRA, Red Brigads.
>These individuals genuinely believe that they are fighting for a good
>cause which is what makes them so dangerous. Of course, we all know that
>they just make the problem worse and I suspect that killing innocent
>people in the name of God, Allah... doesn't really help their
>credibility. Still, that doesn't stop them.
What a load of crap...if the IRA and Red Brigades were as serious
about killing people as the Al Queda Europe would have ceased to exist
a long time ago. Thats the essential difference....the IRA, Red
Brigades and the rest of the fanatics while being terrorists arent
really interested in killing all of you, just enough so that their
demands are met but not enough that the British would just go ape
shit. The IRA problem would have ceased being a problem a long time
ago had the IRA killed the same percentage of Englishmen in the space
of 1 hour.. The Al Queda and those towel headed fanatics think the
world would be just dandy without all of us.
>
>Now if we take the example of Spain, what you are proposing is that
>Spain should simply bomb the baski country or that the UK should bomb
>Ireland in order to get rid of their problem with the IRA. And nobody
>should complain about it because they are within their rights. After all
>they've been attacked, haven't they? Sounds far fetched? This is what
>Bush is proposing when he speaks about attacking Irak.
If the Basks are in the process of aquiring nukes and have given every
indication of being quite capable of delivering said weapon into the
hands of terrorists who would deliver the weapon into your backyard
while giving them plausible denialbility I bet you might change your
tune. You people are playing like this is still yesterday when we all
gladly took our bomb attacks with a stiff upper lip....we took our
share of deaths while keeping a stiff upper lip. 800 of us died prior
to 9/11 to those towel headed assholes...stiff upper lips just provide
a nice target apparently. Well we learn fast...stiff upper lips dont
work. Wouldnt have worked with Hitler or Tojo and wont work with this
latest bunch. Like President Bush said...they will follow them both
into the dustbin of histories failed ideas. And we will be the ones
who put them there.
Your welcome world.
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
PAPA DOC
Sunny
<No.T...@Here.com> wrote in message news:brb2ou4frk4vt0fee...@4ax.com...
Two terrorists, sorting through family photos in their wallets,
1st..... This is my eldest, he is a martyr
2nd..... This is my youngest, he is a martyr
1st..... This is my youngest, also a martyr
2nd..... <sigh> They blow up so fast, don't they
BM
towelheads"......
I bet your wettest dream is owning your own Kalashikof.... and maybe even
get to shoot somebody someday... right ?
Surf some porn you loser
BM
"PAPADOC" <PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by> wrote in message
news:3d7f58f1...@news.west.cox.net...
> I dont want to remember the fallen on this day...I have remembered
> them each day for the last 365 days. I remember the little girl my
> daughters age who was flying with her mom and I imagine the terror
> that must have gone thru her when those towel headed motherfuckers
Lord Data
says...
> You are trying to wiggle around here....the basic fact remains that
> the muslims took the holy lands away from the Christians and the
> Christians went and took it back. Thats simply turn about....
>
You're simplifying. You're saying that religion was the only reason for
the crusades to happen and I'm saying that it was only one of many
reasons.
> >
> >I can't agree here. The reasons for invading Spain were purely
> >imperialistic, not religious. It just turned out that they both were
> >from different religions. If you look at the crusades, you'll see that
> >each party had its own agenda and that religion was just a pretext.
> >Somehow it seemed more politically correct to say that you did it for
> >the sake of you faith rather than because you wanted a larger slice of
> >the pie.
>
> Given his results so far apparently it does.
>
> >Does the fact that you've been to Yale and Harvard really mean anything?
>
> These days it means far less since curves and not wanting to hurt
> someones self esteem mean so much and accomplishments mean so little.
> But there was a time not so long ago that a degree from Yale was
> indeed an accomplishment. And a Harvard MBA does mean quite alot.
>
Have you been to Harvard? I suspect not. Does that make you a lesser
person? So no, it doesn't mean that much.
>
> You want to put things into perspective then you judge 98% of the
> CEO's by the actions of 2%. In general the top management of US
> companies are very honorable.
You'll find that fraud is much more widespread than you think. I am of
course including transactions that are morally questionable but not
considered fraud by law.
> > And you;re of course aware that your beloved
> >president actually committed fraud too himself.
>
> Fraud...??? Oh you can sure bring that evidence here and see if it
> flies. hehe.
>
Sure, no problems. Have a search on Bush and Harken. He has been
investigated by the SEC and has had to pay a hefty fine. It now looks
that his dubious dealings were actually much worse than previously
thought.
>
> > I won't even go into his
> >other "achievements".
>
> I have been nothing but impressed by his conduct of the most pressing
> issue for this country. He understands his duties vis a vis the
> Scum....kill them.
I bet you would have loved to live during the crusades. Then you would
have been able to say: “Tuez les tous, Dieu reconnaitra les siens” which
translated roughly to “Kill them all, God will recognize his own.”
> > Same goes for the vice president. So that wouldn't
> >make me very confident about my government in the first place.
>
> See Im very confident about both of them because I know what the story
> is...like I said if you feel like bringing your evidence here I would
> be delighted.
The proof would be a search on Dick Cheney and Halliburton.
Lord Data
PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by says...
> Moral relativism doesnt impress me try it on someone younger.
>
> >Again, what makes you think that Muslim leaders are any worse than the
> >ones you have? A lot of them are crazy, incompetent, corrupt, extremist,
> >you name, but that doesn't seem to be that much different from America
> >or Europe?
>
> Yea we have guys strapping on bombs all the time and walking into
> Cafe's, we have lots of mothers who are so very proud of their
> children blowing themselves up taking as many women and children and
> fathers as possible, and sheesh just the other day I saw an ad in the
> paper for a flight school for all the fanatic Americans who want to go
> fly Aircraft into buildings.
>
> Im not answering your question because obviously you arent seriously
> saying that Osama and Bush equate to the same result for you and your
> mom.
>
>
I wasn't talking about Osama. He might be the leader of a terrorist
organization or even a spiritual leader for that matter, but he
certainly isn't a leader in the sense of a leader of a country.
By the way, did you forget the Oklahoma bombing? If you take the amount
of people involved in the bombing and divide it by the amount of people
who died and do the same with 9/11, you might find that McVeigh was
actually a much worse terrorist. Yet, at the time, nobody seemed to
think that it was a good reason to invade Irak for instance. And
suddenly it is.
Nobody disputes the fact that terrorism must end and yes, it probably
means using force. Nobody disputes that. Where we don't agree is that
it's certainly not an excuse to unilaterally attack another country on
the pretext of the so called "War on terrorism". You;re basically
saying: "Let's kill them all and ask questions later."
Chuck C.
news:ab8530e1.02091...@posting.google.com:
Good post Bruce, but please dont confuse them with reality.
Chuck
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
Benjamin Franklin
Chuck C.
news:pp9g9.259072$Yd.10...@twister.austin.rr.com:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
>
> "Chuck C." <nony...@all.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns92874E22973B...@63.240.76.16...
>> "Gonzo" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in
>> news:hMXf9.258059$Yd.10...@twister.austin.rr.com:
>>
>> > X-No-Archive: yes
>> >
>> > Why are there so many dumbass people out there that do not
>> > understand that "X-No-Archive: yes" protects their privacy?? Has
>> > nothing at all to do with what I stand for or don't stand for. As
>> > far as standing up for things, well how about eight years in the
>> > military. What have you done for your country lately??
>> >
>> > Ignorance rules supreme I guess.
>> >
>> >> I also love these "X-No-Archive: yes" people. Nothing like
>> >> standing up for what you believe in.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Oh, and nice job ignoring the other points!!!
>
> I only respond to valid and mature postings with more than one
> posting. To idiocy I respond only onece.
>
>
>
>
Well, I got 2 responses, LOL.
Still not coming up with the what we should have done 20 years ago, eh?
It must really make you look bad.
Jon Rail
> feel is of absolutely no value to them. They want me either dead or
> converted to their vision of a 12th century heaven.
Papadoc, the name 'terrorism' kind of implies that how you feel is
actually relevent, don't you think?
Surely if they wanted you all dead, a more suitable path would have
been weapons of mass destruction (making the assumption that they
could obtain them). Instead they hit you were it really hurts, to piss
you off as far as I can tell.
I dont want to offend you, but I think your response was rude, and ..
well just wrong (imo).
PAPADOC
some out of the blue attack on the poor little muslims. When in fact
they were the logical result of the muslim take over of the Holy
Lands. Whether or not either or both were using religion isnt an
issue....
>Sure, no problems. Have a search on Bush and Harken. He has been
>investigated by the SEC and has had to pay a hefty fine. It now looks
>that his dubious dealings were actually much worse than previously
>thought.
Please provide your evidence. I dont like to do searchs to verify
baseless accusations. If the evidence is so obvious and you are so
familiar with it you shouldnt have any problems providing it.
>> > I won't even go into his
>> >other "achievements".
>>
>> I have been nothing but impressed by his conduct of the most pressing
>> issue for this country. He understands his duties vis a vis the
>> Scum....kill them.
>
>I bet you would have loved to live during the crusades. Then you would
>have been able to say: “Tuez les tous, Dieu reconnaitra les siens” which
>translated roughly to “Kill them all, God will recognize his own.”
We have not killed them all...we continue to not kill them all. We
kill the most important of them and the foot soldiers...thats the way
war is and to hear the radical muslims they understand and welcome the
change to spend eternity with 72 White Raisins.
>
>> > Same goes for the vice president. So that wouldn't
>> >make me very confident about my government in the first place.
>>
>> See Im very confident about both of them because I know what the story
>> is...like I said if you feel like bringing your evidence here I would
>> be delighted.
>
>The proof would be a search on Dick Cheney and Halliburton.
Ah but you see I already know the story on Halliburton and am just
seeing if you know as much as you claim. I find that accusations like
yours are always said beneath the radar and when confronted people
like you fade away.
About Harvard....yes certainly I am willing to concede that a person
who has gone to Harvard and gotten an MBA has some very unique
qualities that I will not be able to bring to the table. In the
position of the President those qualities are self evident.
I notice you didnt want to talk about your Moral Equivelancy....how
does that go again. A muslim cleric who calls for the stoning of an
adultress is no worse than a US President who calls for the execution
of a Mass Murderer, a Police officer who shoots and kills a murderer
is no different than the murderer who shoots and kills a family of 5.
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
Exactly what do you propose that we all sit around in a circle and
compare family photos? Or should I put Osama's head on my shoulders
and ask him whats really bothering him..?
Nope killing those who want to fight us sounds like the best idea.
They want a fight, they laughed at us for withdrawing from Beruit 83
well this time they have a fight....and this time we plan on sticking
around.
Why was it ok to go after Hitler and Tojo in this fashion but not ok
to go after people who actually killed more civilians in a US city? No
one had any problem with saying that we were gonna kill Germans and
Japanese for attacking us, but now we get all touchy feely when a far
worse attack occurs with the possibility of even worse attacks to come
from a group of people who dont want us to live.
Sounds like you surf so much porn you have lost touch.
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
could get WMD's he wouldnt hesitate to use them. In an interview about
the 93 WTC Bombing it was pointed out to the terrorist that had the
plan worked over 200,000 people might have died and he replies
EXACTLY.
Terrorism applies to the IRA, Red Brigades but I dont really feel it
applies to the Islamic Maniacs. They dont want to ultimately change
our policy but instead they dream about either converting us or
killing us. Remember Afganistan...that is their vision for the rest of
the world. Look into Sudan where a women who was raped is gonna be
stoned to death for having sex outside of wedlock. This is their
vision....
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
Oh and about Bush being a dummy...exactly why do people try to portray
him in that light when he continues to absolutely destroy his
opponents...? Do they like getting beat up by a Dummy?
1. Bore says Bush a Dummy, then gets outmanuevered and beat in an
election.
2. Demoncrats say Bush a dummy then get outmanuevered and beat on the
tax cuts.
3. Demoncrats and the press say Bush is a dummy then get outmanuevered
and beat on just about everything to do with Afgainistan.
4. Diplomats think they have Bush painted into a corner on Iraq. He
then hoists them on their own petard by showing how irrelevent the UN
has become.
If I were getting beat so often and so bad by a person I certainly
wouldnt describe him as a dummy...makes me look bad. Getting beat by a
Cowboy...weeeeee.
PAPA DOC
Joe M.
news:MPG.17ebae977...@news.clara.net...
> In article <3d817160....@news.west.cox.net>,
> PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by says...
> > Moral relativism doesnt impress me try it on someone younger.
> >
> > >Again, what makes you think that Muslim leaders are any worse than the
> > >ones you have? A lot of them are crazy, incompetent, corrupt,
extremist,
> > >you name, but that doesn't seem to be that much different from America
> > >or Europe?
> >
> > Yea we have guys strapping on bombs all the time and walking into
> > Cafe's, we have lots of mothers who are so very proud of their
> > children blowing themselves up taking as many women and children and
> > fathers as possible, and sheesh just the other day I saw an ad in the
> > paper for a flight school for all the fanatic Americans who want to go
> > fly Aircraft into buildings.
> >
> > Im not answering your question because obviously you arent seriously
> > saying that Osama and Bush equate to the same result for you and your
> > mom.
> >
> >
>
> I wasn't talking about Osama. He might be the leader of a terrorist
> organization or even a spiritual leader for that matter, but he
> certainly isn't a leader in the sense of a leader of a country.
>
You're right, all anti-Osama Muslim leaders in their heart-of-hearts really
do love Americans. They actually embrace Christianity and hold no
disturbing/controversial private beliefs. Why do you assume that all
Muslims who condemn Osama are actually telling the truth? I guess all white
people in America who publicly criticize racism never hold a different
private belief. Very naive and idealistic; seems to be a liberal trademark.
While musing at the stars, you fucking people stumble and fall over the
obvious obstacles here on earth (on your path to the self-righteous higher
ground).
The real issue is how many Muslims are TRULY extremists and what makes YOU
so confident that they are easily distinguishable? What if in reality 95%
of all Muslims wanted Americans to die? What if that were the reality? How
do you KNOW it's not. I am not required to trust *any* Muslims until I am
confident I can distinguish the *real* extremists from the crowd of alleged
moderates. Trust is earned and unfortunately all Muslims suffered a loss of
trust on 9/11. I lost the feeling of security, they lost trust. It's not
my fault the extremist ruined things "for the rest of them". Perhaps if
Muslims did a better job as a people of consistently rejecting extremist
beliefs I might be flexible. Fuck those people both in the US and around
the world that *demand* I be flexible. Who are you to tell me how to feel?
I don't force you to be sensible, don't fucking force me to be flexible.
It is my right to hold Muslims to a different standard than the rest of the
world until I decide to change. I do not have to trust idealists who fail
to appreciate the realities of this world. It's only in practical
application where most idealistic theories fail. ;0)
> By the way, did you forget the Oklahoma bombing? If you take the amount
> of people involved in the bombing and divide it by the amount of people
> who died and do the same with 9/11, you might find that McVeigh was
> actually a much worse terrorist. Yet, at the time, nobody seemed to
> think that it was a good reason to invade Irak for instance. And
> suddenly it is.
>
"Hey fellas, I found it!" Just alerting everyone to the worst example of
human logic in the history of mankind. Let's dissect:
If terrorist X, acting alone, murders 201 innocent victims he is WORSE than
terrorist Y who coordinates 499 other terrorists and masterminds the murder
of 100,000 innocent victims. So you propose an evil-rating scale for
terrorists based on the dead bodies-to-terrorist participant ratio? Wow,
you actually typed this for everyone to read. Amazing, simply amazing.
> Nobody disputes the fact that terrorism must end and yes, it probably
> means using force. Nobody disputes that. Where we don't agree is that
> it's certainly not an excuse to unilaterally attack another country on
> the pretext of the so called "War on terrorism". You;re basically
> saying: "Let's kill them all and ask questions later."
>
Sounds good to me. Certainly better than having them kill me and my family
first while precious time is wasted sorting things out. Hell, I'm just
lucky I was at the WTC on 9/10 instead of 9/11. What a difference a day
makes. On 9/11 I watched from my office window about 2 miles West (felt
like 100 feet). You *see* what I saw and *feel* what I felt that day and
then tell me how flexible you would be.
Again, what IF 95% of all Muslims in Afghanistan hate Americans and support
any effort to kill Americans? Are you certain this is not the case? What %
do you think are anti-American? How do you know, because they tell you? I
am far too skeptical to buy that load of shit. Trust was lost, THEY need to
get it back because I'm not giving it away for free. Ever hear the saying:
"better safe than sorry?" We weren't safe and now we're sorry. I don't
plan on being sorry again. I certainly CAN'T see anything like 9/11 again.
Bottom line, I'd rather be a living skeptic than a dead fool.
--
Joe M.
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Quentin Stephens wrote:
How about the marines in Beruit? How about Lockerbie? How about Khobar?
How about Cole? How about embassies, for the late 70's (Terhan,
fortunately no American was killed,) to the current date?
> > You do remember the '72 Olympics, no?
>
> I was 5 at the time.
Yes. Youngsters nowadays dont think history has any bearing on the
problems, apparently.
> >> Very few. How often did
> >> they die? Seldom. Those onboard those first two planes, and
> >> possibly the one that flew into the Pentagon, particularly the
> >> pilots, would have had every expectation that this was a
> >> 'normal' hijacking.
>
> > How about Entebbe? Were the PFLP kidding? They did kill one
> > elderly lady. Fortunately, they mostly got dead, thanks to Bibi
> > and co, before more were killed.
>
> Again, a very long time ago.
See above...
> > Not that that is the issue at all. You contend that most of the
> > people did not fear for thier lives.
>
> Correct. The release of hostages has usually been used as a
> bargaining counter.
Your wrong. They're used to instill terror in the target audience. Jews,
and Americans, by the threat of death.
Your not winning here, you know...
> > How would you know this, and furthermore, what is the value of
> > this observation?
>
> Because I pay attention to foreign news.
Implying that I do not?
<grin>
You non-Americans just LOVE to engage in the predjudice which holds true
that we dont pay attention to foreign news.
We do.
Now, since you obviously miss my point (your wit is dim), what is the
value of the observation (untrue) that Islamicists dont kill hostages?
> > When you're screaming through the air, at 400kts, below the NYC
> > skyline, you know whats going to happen.
>
> But until it was too late, they didn't.
They knew. And were deathly afriad. Is there some minimum tire frame
within which they must experience this emotion, to somehow validate
this experience, in your eyes?
What does 'too late' mean?
Grow up.
DrOk
Dr Oddness Killtroll
No.T...@Here.com wrote:
Maybe they all just 'beemed up'...
;)
DrOk
Vern Pellerin
>By the way, did you forget the Oklahoma bombing? If you take the amount
>of people involved in the bombing and divide it by the amount of people
>who died and do the same with 9/11, you might find that McVeigh was
>actually a much worse terrorist. Yet, at the time, nobody seemed to
>think that it was a good reason to invade Irak for instance. And
>suddenly it is.
Oh Christ! You CAN'T compare a handfull of American fanatics to
hundreds of thousands of hateful, un-educated, poor, extremests all over
various middle eastern countries, whom have been brainwashed into hating all
Americans and hating all Jews and Christians, because their extremist
Muslim religious leaders have screwed their brains over and blamed ALL their
problems on the US or Israel, their corrupt governments have brought them down
into poverty, and their media MUST tow the religious & government line because
failing to do so would mean torture and death for criticising ANYTHING other
than America or Israel.
At least in America we have the freedom to criticise the president, the
government, and any politicians we want to. We have the freedom to
demonstrate against policy that we don't agree with. We have the freedom to
choose whatever religion we like. Women have the freedom to NOT be stoned
to death. Women have the freedom to leave their homes without their
husbands permission. We have the freedom of press to hear all sides, even if
some of those sides are totally INSANE. Etc.
David
<inv...@invalid.com> writes
>Let's also not forget that the Moors made great advances in Science and
>left us with wonderful architectural remains (ever heard of the
>Alhambra?). We're talking about a civilization that prospered for more
>than half a century and where Muslims, Jews and Christians co-existed
>peacefully.
Didn't you mean half a millennium? Yes, the Alhambra is great. But the
religion of the occupiers of part of Spain for those many years was
still Islam was it not? Although it does seem to have been a tolerant
and relatively benign version.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
David Francis E-Mail reply to <da...@dclf.demon.co.uk>
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Iraq signed an agreement, at the end of the last war, commiting to ending thier
warlike ways (by Iraq, I mean Saddam, not the people. Asw fas as Saddam is
concerned, he IS Iraq, in his mind).
They have not done so. They contribute to the unfounded, and unjustifyed,
vilification of America, by many in the Islamic world. They threaten the whole
world with thier continued pursuit of WMD.
The bottom line is that Saddam benefited from our natural leniance, as a
nation.
We cut him a break.
But, 9/11 changed all that.
No more breaks for the backward, and warlike, from the ME. Tow the line or pay
the price.
Period.
I'm sure you dont understand. We dont care if you do.
We will take thanks, in 20 or 30 years, when the peace which results from our
actions has been a clear benifit to you.
But you wont offer thanks. Its your nature. We understand.
DrOk
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Gonzo wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> Oh my! You do have all the answers don't you.
The fact that you dont have any may cause you to beleive this. Let just say I
have a whole lot more 'answers' than you do. But, thats obvious...
> So tell me friend, what is
> YOUR vision of a new world order?
You like catch phrases, dont you?
Go to school. Read a book.
Start with Boland.
You do know who Boland is, no?
DrOk
>
>
> "Dr Oddness Killtroll" <an...@annex.annex> wrote in message
> news:3D80CFA5...@annex.annex...
> >
> >
> > Gonzo wrote:
> >
> > > X-No-Archive: yes
> > >
> > > Finally a voice of reason. You hit it right on the nail! While
> everybody
> > > else will scream "let's kill ragheads!"
> >
> > Who's screaming that? Really, who is?
> >
> > > , you and I both know that we would
> > > not be in this mess had we not given the Jews weapons and money and had
> we
> > > simply stayed out of it.
> >
> > So, taking care of the underdog, the victims of the ho.locaust, is no
> longer an
> > admirable action? Funny, we all thought so in '45.
> >
> > > I also find it amusing that most of the "let's
> > > kill raghead" types have never served in the military. Let's think
> about
> > > that.
> >
> > 13 years.
> >
> > > So where is our big reward for saving Kuwait's ass? How are gas prices?
> Is
> > > there a new pro-American democracy in Kuwait instead of a dictatorship?
> Do
> > > I need to answer that?
> >
> > No.
> >
> > > No...
> >
> > But you did.
> >
> > So, your argument is that, since we did as we've been compelled, by the
> idiocy
> > of the '70s', and early '80's (can you say 'Boland'?), and NOT intervened
> in the
> > governance of these countries (except in Panama, to a degree), and NOT
> > coompelled them to conform to democratic principles, then its not worth it
> to
> > persue our own interests?
> >
> > Theres a lesson here, but its not the one the liberals want to hear. We've
> > obviously not been involved enough in compelling states to a
> > democratic-captialist form, or enforcing a Pax-Americana.
> >
> > We should be doing both, much more vigourously. A serious dicussion of
> these
> > problems isnt easy to persue in this forum, but, ask yourself, what IS a
> > super-power?
> >
> > What does a Super Power
> >
> >
> > > Sorry for being an a$$ but IMO it's time that WE as a country and a
> people
> > > start pulling our heads out of our asses and start telling our
> polititions
> > > what we really want.
> >
> > What do you think we 'want'?
> >
> > > If we had done that to begin with twenty or so years
> > > ago there would never had been a 9/11 or any other terrorist actions
> taken
> > > against us in the first place by muslims.
> >
> > Really? If we had not supported Israel, then this would not have happened?
> >
> > How do you expalin nearly 2 decades of strife in Lebanon, between Sunni,
> Shia,
> > and Marionite? And dont say its Isreals fault, because it is not.
> >
> > The Islamic world is backwards, poorly led, and damn jealous of the west.
> Its an
> > old story.
> >
> > The problems there originate within those nations (NOT Isreal-Pal), and
> they'd
> > exist regardless of our stance. Even if Israel did not exist. It would be
> nice
> > to remove that excuse, tho..
> >
> > DrOk
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Victor" <vbuttaro@nyc.[remove this]rr.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3d7f9...@corp-goliath.newsgroups.com...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > They will never like us.
> > > > > We need to get over any "Politically Correct" desire to
> > > > > "Understand and Come together" with them.
> > > > > They are barbarians, who want the world to revert to 1100 AD.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > How ironic you should mention 1100AD. As this isn't far removed form
> when
> > > > the Crusades began. And what were the Crusades? The last attempts of
> > > > religious fanatics to destroy a people who didn't believe what they
> > > believed
> > > > in. For a cause. This time around is was us (the Christians) against
> them.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think trying to kill them all this time around is going to
> work
> > > any
> > > > better than it did back in 1100 AD. The Moslem world's hatred of the
> West
> > > > unfortunately probably started with the Crusades. Not to justify what
> > > happen
> > > > on 9/11..but it's quite obvious that they don't want the West in their
> > > > lands. Personally I say let's get the hell out. They want to revert
> their
> > > > world back to the Middle Ages, what should we care. Of course with all
> the
> > > > oil they got we won't be leaving anytime soon. And we'll deal with
> > > countries
> > > > who in truth are our enemies as long as oil is involved.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry but violence begets more violence. Doesn't mean we shouldn't
> punish
> > > > those responsible for 9/11..but when will it end. And sorry..I doubt
> > > > treating them like we did Japan is really a viable option. Especially
> if
> > > > that implies nuclear weapons. Might have been a good idea when we were
> the
> > > > only ones with the bomb. But I don't want to risk WWIII and Armageddon
> to
> > > > avenge the deaths of 3000 people.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News
> > > ==----------
> > > > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the
> World!
> > > > -----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers
> > > =-----
> >
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Very3 wrote:
> those palestinians are creepy. they blow up some little boys and little girls
> on purpose , israel responds and targets the bombers, maybe, MAYBE a few
> civilians die and the palestinians call Israel terrorists. the palestinians are
> a violent people PERIOD.
> dressing their own children in battle gear.
> sick sick people. but thankfully israel keeps them in line.
I dont view tha Pals quite so harshly. They have a warlike culture, to be sure
(read the kuran), but the people are just the pawns of willful leaders. Thats where
the kids in web gear comes from.
DrOk
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Bruce Rennie wrote:
> Dr Oddness Killtroll <an...@annex.annex> wrote in message news:<3D80CFA5...@annex.annex>...
> > Gonzo wrote:
> >
> > > X-No-Archive: yes
> > >
> > > Finally a voice of reason. You hit it right on the nail! While everybody
> > > else will scream "let's kill ragheads!"
> >
> > Who's screaming that? Really, who is?
> >
> > > , you and I both know that we would
> > > not be in this mess had we not given the Jews weapons and money and had we
> > > simply stayed out of it.
> >
> > So, taking care of the underdog, the victims of the ho.locaust, is no longer an
> > admirable action? Funny, we all thought so in '45.
> >
>
> The original poster might be interested to know that the US pretty
> much did "stay out of it" until the '73 war. Up to that point, Israel
> got most of it's weapons from France and Britain. And since the land
> that everyone is arguing about was taken in the '67 war, you'd think
> France and Britain would attract more criticism wouldn't you? Strange
> how that doesn't happen.
>
> /bruce
Good point, Bruce,
Additionally, the US FORCED Britain, France, and Israel, to withdraw from Suez, after those 3 took
sanai, and the canal, in response to Egypts nationalization of same in '56.
We, along with RUSSIA, OPPOSED our closest allies, and Israel, and sided with Egypt. And those 3
countries withdrew.
This is more about jealously than the rights of the Palestinians. It always has been.
DrOk
Phil Young
wrote:
>1. Bore says Bush a Dummy, then gets outmanuevered and beat in an
>election.
>2. Demoncrats say Bush a dummy then get outmanuevered and beat on the
>tax cuts.
Right, I've seen this several times from you.
You consistently (if not univerally) refer to 'Gore' as 'Bore' and
'Democrats' as 'Demoncrats'
All very hilarious, and I'm sure we are all impressed by your Wildean
wit.
Perhaps you can help me, what are appropriate amusing mispellings for
'Bush' and 'Republican' ?
For Bush I can't decide between 'Tush' (because the man is clearly an
Areshole) or 'Lush' because he is a self admitted alcholic.
Unforunately, there doesn't seem to be a slang term for coke-head of
the pattern ?ush or that would be a contender as well.
'Republicans' a less trivial problem, the best I could come up with
is 'Replublicunts'.
Perhaps you have some suggestions, I certainly have some for you.
All the very best,
Phil Young
PAPADOC
abetted by Al Queda and Iraq. Here are some great links detailing the
evidence so far.
http://www.spiritoftruth.org/post_009.htm
http://www.enduring-freedom-operation.org/laurie1.stm
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/648rrstd.asp
http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?020325fa_FACT1
Maybe we should fire the entire Managements of the CIA and FBI and
hire the reporters from the New Yorker and Laurie Mylroie...?
Certainly seems that the CIA and FBI couldnt find their ass with
either hand in a lite room with no time limit. Im afraid that 8 years
of Clinton has destroyed both of those orginizations and the best
thing to do is disband them and start over.
PAPA DOC
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Lord Data wrote:
> In article <3D809CC1...@annex.annex>, an...@annex.annex says...
> > Ivan,
> >
> > The first war between Isam and Christianity occured when Isalm invaded Spain,
> > and moved North into France, to withing 100 miles of Paris.
> >
>
> You are probably referring to the battle of Poitiers which is completely
> unconnected with the invasion of Spain which happenend for very
> different reasons. Here is a quote for you taken from the Britannica
> encyclopedia.
No really, but, you may beleive so.
Islam invaded Christendom 100 years BEFORE Christendom first invaded the Holy Land.
Thats a fact.
[snip part the implies that Islam invaded spain becuase they were 'asked to']
> I take it that when you refer to "Islam invading Spain", you refer to
> Berbers.
Berbers are Muslims, no? An Islamic satae was created, no?
> Although Muslims, Berbers and Ottomans had little in common for
> instance except for a "common" religion, it's a bit like saying that
> protestants and catholics are the same thing. Might not matter to you
> but it does to them.
It does matter to me, but I wonder why you desire to make irrelevant distictions.
> > Ever heard of the Moors?
>
> Oh yes, let's talk about the Moors.
Goody.
> I'm Spanish by the way, so I know
> two or three things about them.
Double goody. More of a requirement to be correct tho, since you've provided your
bona-fides...
> Here is a definition for you taken again
> from the Britannica enyclopedia.
I thought you said you knew a thing or three. Sigh, oh well, encyclo away, then...
> "in English usage, a Moroccan or, formerly, a member of the Muslim
> population of Spain, of mixed Arab, Spanish, and Berber origins, who
> created the Arab Andalusian civilization and subsequently settled as
> refugees in North Africa between the 11th and 17th centuries."
Ya, right. Like I said. Moors are the descendants of Islamic invaders of Spain.
Shed some light. You promised to...
> So Moors are as Spanish as the descendents of the European Settlers in
> America (That would be you if you're American).
I didnt say they werent Spanish. I said Islam invaed Christendom first.
And you verified this via the EB.
I furthermore contend that Islam intended to subdue Christendom, and this was a bad
idea, as
1. It didnt work
AND
2. It initiated a practice which continued for another 500 years.
And, jst to provide you with some useful information, from an Arab perspective:
Regarding the The Battle of Poitiers, 732 Anon Arab Chronicler
From 711 Muslim forces crossed the Straits of Gibraltar, conquered the Visigothic
Kingdom, and in less than a decade crossed the Pyrenees. In 732, under the command
of Abd-er- rahman, they were decisively defeated by Charles Martel and the Franks
at the Battle of Poitiers [or Tours]. This event looms much larger in Western
history than Muslim - leading to a famous passage of purple prose by Edward Gibbon
about minarets rather than spires in Oxford if the Muslims had won. The event was
notice the Muslim world, however, and the following is from an Arab chronicle.
The Moslems smote their enemies, and passed the river Garonne, and laid waste the
country, and took captives without number. And that army went through all places
like a desolating storm. Prosperity made those warriors insatiable. At the passage
of the river, Abderrahman overthrew the count, and the count retired into his
stronghold, but the Moslems fought against it, and entered it by force, and slew
the count; for everything gave way to their scimitars, which were the robbers of
lives. All the nations of the Franks trembled at that terrible army, and they
betook them to their king Caldus [Charles Martel], and told him of the havoc made
by the Moslem horsemen, and bow they rode at their will through all the land of
Narbonne, Toulouse, and Bordeaux, and they told the king of the death of their
count. Then the king bade them be of good cheer, and offered to aid them. . . . He
mounted his horse, and he took with him a host that could not be numbered, and went
against the Moslems. And he came upon them at the great city of Tours. And
Abderrahman and other prudent cavaliers saw the disorder of the Moslem troops, who
were loaded with spoil; but they did not venture to displease the soldiers by
ordering them to abandon everything except their arms and war-horses. And
Abderrahman trusted in the valour of his soldiers, and in the good fortune which
had ever attended him. But such defect of discipline always is fatal to armies. So
Abderrabman and his host attacked Tours to gain still more spoil, and they fought
against it so fiercely that they stormed the city almost before the eyes of the
army that came to save it; and the fury and the cruelty of the Moslems towards the
inhabitants of the city were like the fury and cruelty of raging tigers. It was
manifest that God's chastisement was sure to follow such excesses; and fortune
thereupon turned her back upon the Moslems.
Near the river Owar [Loire], the two great hosts of the two languages and the two
creeds were set in array against each other. The hearts of Abderrahman, his
captains and his men were filled with wrath and pride, and they were the first to
begin to fight. The Moslem horsemen dashed fierce and frequent forward against the
battalions of the Franks, who resisted manfully, and many fell dead on either side,
until the going down of the sun. Night parted the two armies: but in the grey of
the morning the Moslems returned to the battle. Their cavaliers had soon hewn their
way into the center of the Christian host. But many of the Moslems were fearful for
the safety of the spoil which they had stored in their tents, and a false cry arose
in their ranks that some of the enemy were plundering the camp; whereupon several
squadrons of the Moslem horsemen rode off to protect their tents. But it seemed as
if they fled; and all the host was troubled. And while Abderrahman strove to check
their tumult, and to lead them back to battle, the warriors of the Franks came
around him, and he was pierced through with many spears, so that he died. Then all
the host fled before the enemy, and many died in the flight. . . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chrisitian crusades were fed by the fervor associated with the Islamic invasion
of Spain, and France, for plunder and glory. To suggest otherwise, with flowery
quotes about peacful Islamic societies doesnt address that basic fact.
> Let's also not forget that the Moors made great advances in Science and
> left us with wonderful architectural remains (ever heard of the
> Alhambra?).
Sure. I am quite familiar with the time, and region. There is much for the Islamic
culture to be proud of, in thier (distant) past.
Not quite so much in the present, and recent past, tho,yes? In fact, that lies at
the heart of this problem.
> We're talking about a civilization that prospered for more
> than half a century and where Muslims, Jews and Christians co-existed
> peacefully.
50 years isnt a very long time. And how does an invasion, and the establishent of a
tolerant, but most certainly Islamic, state, 100+ years before the first Christian
Crusade support your (apparent) view that the Christian Crusades were somehow
worse, more evil?
> > Read a book.
>
> I would suggest you start reading one yourself and come back once you'll
> have something useful to say.
I have, and do. Islam contributed GREATLY to the current conflict. To suggest
otehrwise is to be ignorant, and, ultimately irrelevant.
> It's never too late too learn and you
> might even surpass the idiot that is running the US.
You may need a large dose of your own advice. And, lets not go on about leaders, as
your man Franco was quite a piece of work, your support on Naziism, as a pay back
for the Phalange victory should be a source of shame, your recent leaders have
been less than stellar, your Basque problem is a stain on your nations pride, and
lastly the severly patriarchal society you live in is an embarrasment to civiliced
people of the west. You treat women like cattle.
Now, you may feel a great sense of indignant superiority, when you consdier, and
characterize, the president in the manner you do, but given the above facts, I
understand your view as a simple inability to come to terms with your own sordid
history. You, instead, concern yourself with dreamy notions of Americans.
Not to worry, we''l fix the world for you, again. Just carry on with your siesta,
or bull fight, or whatever is most important to you.
> You rule Ivan!
Ya, he was called Ivan the Terrible for a reason...
<oops!>
DrOk
PAPADOC
Reporter was easily able to document that. Atta met with the Top
Iraqis Agent of death....twice. Saddam has a training base with a 707
for teaching people how to take over a plane with only knives...Saddam
has used Chemical weapons on nearly everyone he has fought, Al Queda
are hiding there now. So who does Saddam compare with..?
>I wasn't talking about Osama. He might be the leader of a terrorist
>organization or even a spiritual leader for that matter, but he
>certainly isn't a leader in the sense of a leader of a country.
Actually in OUR sense of the word there are NO leaders in the Middle
East except Sharon. The rest are a bunch of thugs and criminals who
spread their criminality about with schools teaching young children
how to commit suicide. Right before the intafada took place I actually
started to believe that maybe it would be better for Israel to acede
to the PLO. Now I understand that in no fashion do any of those thugs
in the PLO deserve a government....
>By the way, did you forget the Oklahoma bombing? If you take the amount
>of people involved in the bombing and divide it by the amount of people
>who died and do the same with 9/11, you might find that McVeigh was
>actually a much worse terrorist. Yet, at the time, nobody seemed to
>think that it was a good reason to invade Irak for instance. And
>suddenly it is.
Actually the Oklahoma bombing is another reason to attack Iraq. There
is lots of evidence that Middle East terrorists were involved in the
training and supplying of McVeigh and Nichols.
>
>Nobody disputes the fact that terrorism must end and yes, it probably
>means using force. Nobody disputes that. Where we don't agree is that
>it's certainly not an excuse to unilaterally attack another country on
>the pretext of the so called "War on terrorism". You;re basically
>saying: "Let's kill them all and ask questions later."
No lets wade into their soldiers and kill them all. They must
understand down to the level of the population that when you threaten
and attack the US a very grave price will be paid. There is plenty of
evidence about Iraqis involvement in terrorism. Means, Motive.
We shall not wait for the rest of the world to decide its a good idea
to rid ourselves of this threat. They started it we will finish it at
a time and in a manner of our own choosing.
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
me proud to be French. hehe
PAPA DOC
PAPADOC
Losing sucks huh.
PAPA DOC
Lord Data
PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by says...
> Ah the battle of Tours when the French were kicking ass....
> sorta makes
It was certainly one hell of a battle and the French certainly did the
trick.
> me proud to be French. hehe
>
Now that I have a hard time to believe that you're French. You might
have a French name, you might have French origins, but surely you're not
really French. Is that what you meant?
> PAPA DOC
>
Phil Young
<an...@annex.annex> wrote:
>Nonsense.
>
>Iraq signed an agreement, at the end of the last war, commiting to ending thier
>warlike ways (by Iraq, I mean Saddam, not the people. Asw fas as Saddam is
>concerned, he IS Iraq, in his mind).
>
Perhaps you could remind me what the current status of the ABM treaty
is, you know, the one signed by the USA.
Do you think the world should take their moral lead from the USA
vis-a-vis their approach to treaties ?
Surely they wouldn't unilaterally repudiate it ?? That would really
shatter my illusions.
No, on reflection, the USA signed it, it's there for good. Thier word
is their bond.
Cheers,
phil Young
Phil Young
wrote:
>Actually in OUR sense of the word there are NO leaders in the Middle
>East except Sharon. The rest are a bunch of thugs and criminals who
>spread their criminality about with schools teaching young children
>how to commit suicide. Right before the intafada took place I actually
>started to believe that maybe it would be better for Israel to acede
>to the PLO. Now I understand that in no fashion do any of those thugs
>in the PLO deserve a government....
>
How irritating for you that they were elected.
Presumably 'rag-head' votes don't count.
I'd make them vote again and again until they got it right.
I suspect that you might not agree with my views, but I am consoled by
the thought that as an American, you would fight to the death for my
rights to hold them.
Thank god for President Bartlett, now that's a man you can respect.
Cheers,
Phil Young
Phil Young
wrote:
>
>Actually the Oklahoma bombing is another reason to attack Iraq. There
>is lots of evidence that Middle East terrorists were involved in the
>training and supplying of McVeigh and Nichols.
>
>
What was that you were saying about 'tin-foil beanie hats' ?
What size do you take ?
JFK - Iraq ? (presumably elbowing the FBI and the CIA out of the way -
less of a grassy knoll, more of a grassy football pitch)
Mnt. St. Helens - Iraq ?
Jimmy Hoffa -Iraq ?
I've just farted, goddam towel-headed bastards, kill them all, then
kill everybody else just to be safe.
Lord Data
phi...@ntlworld.com says...
>
> Thank god for President Bartlett, now that's a man you can respect.
>
I'll have to admit my complete ignorance. Who was/is president Bartlett?
Phil Young
wrote:
You're right, I voted Socialist Alliance, got wiped out by the Tory
scum (aka 'new' labour - that's presumably new in the right-wing tory
bastard sense of the word).
There was a really good cartoon in last weeks Private Eye - Bush (or
Tush/Lush whatever) walking his runty little dog, with a thought
balloon off the dog saying 'Why does he keep calling me Tony ?' Mind
you, a thought ballon off GWB would be stretching credibility to it's
limits, wouldn't it ?
However, in your excitement you seem to have avoided answering my
question. Is it 'Lush' or 'Tush' ?? Is 'Republicunt' suitable.
Enquring minds, you know.
Toodle pip, Oscar,
Cheers,
Phil Young
Phil Young
wrote:
It's the fictional democratic president of the USA from a program
called 'The White Wing'.
Played by Martin Sheen. The character is written as an intelligent
and deeply moral person.
No resemblence to the actual current president is implied or the be
inferred, one suspects.
Cheers,
Phil Young
Lord Data
phi...@ntlworld.com says...
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 20:57:03 +0100, Lord Data <inv...@invalid.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <c2g4oucmuk5ovp3fh...@4ax.com>,
> >phi...@ntlworld.com says...
> >
> >>
> >> Thank god for President Bartlett, now that's a man you can respect.
> >>
> >
> >I'll have to admit my complete ignorance. Who was/is president Bartlett?
>
>
> It's the fictional democratic president of the USA from a program
> called 'The White Wing'.
>
> Played by Martin Sheen. The character is written as an intelligent
> and deeply moral person.
>
Believe it or not, I used to believe that about our good old TOny.
Didn't last long though. :( I guess better that than the Tories.
> No resemblence to the actual current president is implied or the be
> inferred, one suspects.
Nice one! :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Phil Young
>
>
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Well, there's you, Lafayette, and a few million others who've stood up,
over the years, when they had too (didnt stop 'em from impressing our
sailors in the 1790's, but...). So, I cannot paint with too broad a brush.
I sometimes have a slight disdain for some of my Irish bretheren, however,
by and large they're Ok. Same with the French, in my view. They just take
great pleasure in highlighting how 'separate' they are from us...
In fact, they're kinda likin' the idea that we're going into Iraq. There
open door policy regarding Mideastern emigre's is starting to scare them.
There are more Muslims in France now than Catholics.
<kinda makes you wonder who won the Battle of Tours>
;)
On another note, I hope all is well with you and yours!
DrOk
<Go Patriots!>
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Dont give up your day job.
The Great American Novel is certainly NOT bouncing inside of your Wildean
wit-space.
DrOk
<BoredbythickDemoncrats>
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Phil Young wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 13:00:45 -0400, Dr Oddness Killtroll
> <an...@annex.annex> wrote:
>
> >Nonsense.
> >
> >Iraq signed an agreement, at the end of the last war, commiting to ending thier
> >warlike ways (by Iraq, I mean Saddam, not the people. Asw fas as Saddam is
> >concerned, he IS Iraq, in his mind).
> >
>
> Perhaps you could remind me what the current status of the ABM treaty
> is, you know, the one signed by the USA.
Dont breach complex issues if your not prepared to deal with them in totality. You
are in the Lions den here. The ABM Treaty was a product of the Cold War, bipolarity,
and the state of technology at that time. The United States and Soviet Union had
both deployed significant strategic nuclear forces that increasingly came to rely on
long-range ballistic missiles. In an attempt to forestall a further Soviet increase
in the number of such systems, the United States sought and obtained from the Soviet
Union in 1972 an interim agreement for the limitation of "strategic offensive arms"
(Interim Agreement), which essentially froze the number of strategic ballistic
missile launchers of the two sides at existing levels. At the same time, the two
parties entered into a formal treaty (the ABM Treaty) on the limitation of
"antiballistic missile systems," or systems designed to defend against strategic
ballistic missiles.
The ABM Treaty thus enshrined as strategic doctrine the principle of deterrence
through threat of retaliation. Since neither side was free to deploy unlimited
defenses against the strategic ballistic missiles of the other, each nation sought
to deter any outright attack by the other through its ability to threaten
overwhelming retaliation against an attack with its own nuclear-armed strategic
ballistic missiles. The Interim Agreement and the ABM Treaty were bilateral
agreements applicable only to U.S. and Soviet strategic ballistic missiles and ABM
systems. While the Soviets were worried about U.K. and French strategic nuclear
forces, and both the Soviet Union and the United States had reason to be concerned
about Chinese nuclear forces, these forces were not limited by either agreement.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and the end of the Cold War, the
underpinnings of the ABM Treaty changed. Neither the United States nor Russia (the
ultimate successor to the strategic nuclear forces of the Soviet Union) felt, as
they had during the Cold War, seriously threatened any longer by the other's
strategic nuclear forces. In the START II Treaty, both the United States and Russia
agreed to a radical reduction of their strategic nuclear forces. But if massive
strategic nuclear forces were no longer required to deter a U.S.-Russian conflict,
other threats had emerged. The 1990-91 Gulf War revealed the strategic significance
of even short-range ballistic missiles armed with conventional warheads. Scud
missile attacks by Iraq on Israel sought to provoke Israeli entrance into the war in
order to fracture the broad coalition of states supporting U.S. efforts to expel
Iraq from Kuwait. The rapid deployment of U.S. Patriot missile batteries to defend
against the Iraqi Scuds helped allow Israel to remain out of the war and facilitated
the victory of the coalition forces.
The attempted coup against then-Soviet Secretary General Mikhail Gorbachev in August
1991 raised serious questions about the command of Soviet strategic nuclear forces
and gave new credence to the risk of accidental or unauthorized launches of such
forces. Today, this concern may be even more serious with respect to China because
of its domestic political uncertainties and its relatively primitive command and
control systems and procedures.
Additionally, a reminder; The Soviet Union doesnt exist anymore. Treaties are
abrogated when the entities involved cease to exist.
Find a better example of US lack of trustworthyness.
> Do you think the world should take their moral lead from the USA
> vis-a-vis their approach to treaties ?
Yes. The fact that you dont simply displays your ignorance.
> Surely they wouldn't unilaterally repudiate it ?? That would really
> shatter my illusions.
<shakes head>
> No, on reflection, the USA signed it, it's there for good. Thier word
> is their bond.
It is.
Saddams is not.
> Cheers,
That bar is in my hometown. How come you Brits like it so much?
DrOk
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Phil Young wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 19:17:37 GMT, PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by (PAPADOC)
> wrote:
>
> >Awww Phil Im sure that the Demoncrats will win again....one day.
> >
> >Losing sucks huh.
> >
> >PAPA DOC
> >
> >>All the very best,
> >>
> >>Phil Young
>
> You're right, I voted Socialist Alliance,
<smirk>
And I though ALL you Brits were smart...
Get over the '30's nostalgia, pally. Burgess, et al were wrong minded.
> Is it 'Lush' or 'Tush' ?? Is 'Republicunt' suitable.
You're a peice of work.
Not good work, mind you...
> Enquring minds, you know.
Where?
> Toodle pip, Oscar,
Eat me, Mary.
DrOk
Dr Oddness Killtroll
Phil Young wrote:
> It's the fictional democratic president of the USA from a program
> called 'The White Wing'.
Thats fiction, as you indicated. You DO know what fiction is?
> Played by Martin Sheen. The character is written as an intelligent
> and deeply moral person.
He IS Bill Clinton, you smurf...
> No resemblence to the actual current president is implied or the be
> inferred, one suspects.
Mucho resemblo the noblo himself, tho, no?
Get a grip, and stay outa American cuture. Its clearly too heady for you.
I could explain in more detail, but...
DrOk
Quentin Stephens
news:3D81FC3A...@annex.annex:
>
>
> Quentin Stephens wrote:
>
>> Dr Oddness Killtroll <an...@annex.annex> wrote in
>> news:3D80EA22...@annex.annex:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Quentin Stephens wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dr Oddness Killtroll <an...@annex.annex> wrote in
>> >> news:3D7FBF57...@annex.annex:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Quentin Stephens wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> PAP...@jimbobs.drive.by (PAPADOC) wrote in
>> >> >> news:3d7f58f1.34270597 @news.west.cox.net:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > I dont want to remember the fallen on this day...I have
>> >> >> > remembered them each day for the last 365 days. I
>> >> >> > remember the little girl my daughters age who was
>> >> >> > flying with her mom and I imagine the terror that must
>> >> >> > have gone thru her when those towel headed
>> >> >> > motherfuckers told her she was gonna die.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Ah, but the true evil is that they didn't.
>> >> >
>> >> > Are you kidding? I mean by that, that no serious person
>> >> > can beleive that folks on those planes were not IN FEAR
>> >> > FOR THIER LIVES.
>> >>
>> >> How many hostages died before Sept 11 2001?
>> >
>> > Look, you seem to be suggesting that killing innocents is
>> > something new in the Islamist pursuit of thier (nebulous)
>> > aims and goals. That belies the fact of Munich, 30 years ago.
>>
>> So you have to go that far back? I think this demonstrates my
>> point.
>
> How about the marines in Beruit? How about Lockerbie? How about
> Khobar? How about Cole?
None of those were hijack situations.
> How about embassies, for the late 70's
> (Terhan, fortunately no American was killed,) to the current
> date?
You prove my point: the hostages were all released alive.
>> > You do remember the '72 Olympics, no?
>>
>> I was 5 at the time.
>
> Yes. Youngsters nowadays dont think history has any bearing on
> the problems, apparently.
I don't deny that it sometimes happened, but *usually* did not.
>> > Not that that is the issue at all. You contend that most of
>> > the people did not fear for thier lives.
>>
>> Correct. The release of hostages has usually been used as a
>> bargaining counter.
>
> Your wrong. They're used to instill terror in the target
> audience. Jews, and Americans, by the threat of death.
This is simply not true.
> Your not winning here, you know...
Actually, given that you have to resort to insult and refuse to
address the issue, I rather think I am.
>> > How would you know this, and furthermore, what is the value
>> > of this observation?
>>
>> Because I pay attention to foreign news.
>
> Implying that I do not?
On the contrary. You asked a direct question and received a direct
answer.
> Now, since you obviously miss my point
Not at all.
> (your wit is dim),
Insults get you nowhere.
> is the value of the observation (untrue) that Islamicists dont
> kill hostages?
Don't put words into my mouth. I said that usually, hostages are
not killed.
<further insult deleted>
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
PAPA DOC
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
vanished and its not us.
Notice how the world didnt end and the Russians didnt lose their minds
when we got out of the ABM treaty which btw was our right.
PAPA DOC
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
>
>How irritating for you that they were elected.
Stalin was elected as well....so was Mao. I guess they were legitimate
in your eyes. No Arab state has free elections by anyones standards
much less ours....no free press, no freedom of religion, no freedom of
speech, no freedom of associations makes it pretty fucking hard to
have an election.
>
>Presumably 'rag-head' votes don't count.
Nope they sure do count when they have the ability to actually cast
their votes freely with a selection of candidates that have had the
chance to present their cases.
>
>I'd make them vote again and again until they got it right.
Arent you cute.
>I suspect that you might not agree with my views, but I am consoled by
>the thought that as an American, you would fight to the death for my
>rights to hold them.
If you were a US citizen certainly.
>Thank god for President Bartlett, now that's a man you can respect.
Oooh that cut right to the bone...oooh.
PAPA DOC
>
>Cheers,
>
>Phil Young
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Yea just because James Woosley Former director of the CIA under
Clinton, or a variety of other highly placed Intelligence officers see
alot of truth in what Laurie Mylroie has to say doesnt mean someone as
brilliant and ever so man about the world would understand.
Laurie Mylroie
http://www.aei.org/shop1/shops/1/4127-2qas.htm
PAPA DOC
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
But immediatly upon rising from their seats the Hijackers began
killing. They killed passengers who showed the least big of resistance
and they killed the Pilots. This was reported on both the flights that
went into the towers. This alone would signal that this hijack was
quite a different affair to all involved since most know that
hijackings dont usually involve death. Especially not to the crew
since you need them to fly.
Your main point is not valid because indeed that little girl would
have been terrified by the mayhem...and their words of terror. They
DID say they were all gonna die.
And no you are not winning.
PAPA DOC
Phil Young
wrote:
>In article <i7h4ouk7ip1lj729d...@4ax.com>,
>phi...@ntlworld.com says...
>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 20:57:03 +0100, Lord Data <inv...@invalid.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <c2g4oucmuk5ovp3fh...@4ax.com>,
>> >phi...@ntlworld.com says...
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Thank god for President Bartlett, now that's a man you can respect.
>> >>
>> >
>> >I'll have to admit my complete ignorance. Who was/is president Bartlett?
>>
>>
>> It's the fictional democratic president of the USA from a program
>> called 'The White Wing'.
>>
I do apologise, that should read 'West Wing' - which is apparently a
wing of the White House. At least it is until Osama Bin-bag pays
another visit........
>> Played by Martin Sheen. The character is written as an intelligent
>> and deeply moral person.
>>
>
>Believe it or not, I used to believe that about our good old TOny.
>Didn't last long though. :( I guess better that than the Tories.
>
What happened....the plan was perfect....
Better than the Tories yes - but so is drinlking a cup of cold vomit.
Somebody elses vomit.
Lord Data
<snip>
> You may need a large dose of your own advice. And, lets not go on about leaders, as
> your man Franco was quite a piece of work, your support on Naziism, as a pay back
> for the Phalange victory should be a source of shame
>
See, this is where you lose all your credibility, no matter what your
arguments are (and at one point I almost thought yo had the ability to
have one. Nowhere in my posts did I show any support for what Franco has
done. And yes, I am certainly ashamed for a lot of the past and current
action from my country, be it the conquest of America, the inquisition,
Franco, you name it. You don't see me blaming you for what happened to
the Natives, the Enron scandal, the civil war, you name it. And for your
info, my family paid a terrible price after Francos victory.
> , your recent leaders have
> been less than stellar,
That is, if you know any of them. By the way, I didn't show any support
for them either.
> your Basque problem is a stain on your nations pride,
LEt's talk about that once you'll actually understand the problem.
> and
> lastly the severly patriarchal society you live in is an embarrasment to civiliced
> people of the west. You treat women like cattle.
If by that you're referring the to the fact that we treat our family
with respect, then yes, I'm afraid we're guilty of that. In our defense
I'll point that I think this is happening in other countries too, even
in the US, so quick, do something about it!
> Now, you may feel a great sense of indignant superiority, when you consdier, and
> characterize, the president in the manner you do, but given the above facts, I
> understand your view as a simple inability to come to terms with your own sordid
> history. You, instead, concern yourself with dreamy notions of Americans.
As opposed to you, I have the ability to appreciate other cultures than
my own. I find the US to be a fascinating country which of course has
its own problems and shortfalls, but tell me of a country that hasn't.
>
> Not to worry, we''l fix the world for you, again. Just carry on with your siesta,
> or bull fight, or whatever is most important to you.
>
Yeah, whatever
Lord Data
says...
Still, that doesn't make you French. And I doubt you'd be happy living
in France to be honest.
Phil Young
<an...@annex.annex> wrote:
>
>
>Phil Young wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 13:00:45 -0400, Dr Oddness Killtroll
>> <an...@annex.annex> wrote:
>>
Hello Dr. Killtroll, or my I call you Oddness ?
You have a potential point regarding the USSR no longer existing. I'm
afraid my eyes galzed over the rest of your O-level history essay. It
did seem a touch defensive though.
How about Steel tariffs ?? Seems a bit odd that, introducing trade
barriers whilst simulataneously preaching the virtues of
Globalisation. Maybe Globalisation is for other people, not USA
citizens ?
How about the repudiation of many of the treaties signed with the
native american nations - you know, those people who were living in
the country for a couple of thousand years before 1492. Mind you, I
expect they were rag-heads of some description and therefore not
worthy of any considerations.
Kill them ....kill them all.... they must DIE !!! (Oops, I think I'm
channelling our old chum PapaDoc for a second there, normal service
will be resumed imminently)
>
>> Do you think the world should take their moral lead from the USA
>> vis-a-vis their approach to treaties ?
>
>Yes. The fact that you dont simply displays your ignorance.
>
I'm sure I display my ignorance in many ways every day. Regarding
some aspects of USA government behaviour as repugnant doesn't feature
amongst them however.
>> Surely they wouldn't unilaterally repudiate it ?? That would really
>> shatter my illusions.
>
><shakes head>
>
>> No, on reflection, the USA signed it, it's there for good. Thier word
>> is their bond.
>
>It is.
Unless you're a native American.
>
>Saddams is not.
>
Is not what ? Saddam is not American's bond, I'd appreciate it if you
could make a tiny effort to be a little more coherent, old chap.
>> Cheers,
>
>That bar is in my hometown. How come you Brits like it so much?
>
>DrOk
It's also salutation. Is 'Cheer's' an actual bar or is it fictional,
I thought that you'd know, being such an expert on fiction (see post
below)
TTFN,
Phil Young
Phil Young
Do try not to top-post, there's a good chap, it make the flow
difficult to follow.
I woder what the USAs reaction would be if the CIS unveilled their
plans for some magic orbital rail-gun, big mirror laser-o-matic
satellite defense system ? You know since they didn't sign a treaty
that wouldn't allow it, I expect it wouldn't be a problem for you ?
Please god, don't let Micro$oft write the OS for your's though.......
TTFN,
Phil Young