1,352 Forum Posts by "Commander-K25"
At 3/5/02 01:57 AM, VA7DAS wrote: Organized Religion, faith or sham? Why is it we seem to need this crutch, and these false idols? Why do we have the need to feed this parasite we call church, which is the only tax free buisness in America.
It's not a business. It makes no profits. It uses its funds to help the needy and improve the community. Those who give to the church do so willingly.
So the important question I ask is, what good is it?
Salvation.
The only argument I think people can come up with to convert people like me is fear, fear of hell, fear of society; however, if you seek religion for thoses reasons your just as bad as the sheep who follow for no reason. When you die your dead, you no longer exist in any sentient form, your fucking worm food. So go live life and do not waste it in a house of false words.
Excerpted from Romans 1:16 - 2:10
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth...For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections, for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature; And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful, Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil... But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good...
At 3/4/02 11:29 PM, GameboyCC wrote:At 3/2/02 03:10 PM, Commander-K25 wrote: It's time for some moral reform in America. We've degenerated a lot over the past few decades, especially since the 60's. That's where a lot of it started, leftist hippies who's idea of morality was, "If it feels good, do it."Dude, the 60's weren't about that. Hippies were rebeling against the tight ass CONSERVATIVE rule over the 50's culture. The lies in the media, the open racism and hypocracy, and pure conformity and repression of ideals.
It was the start of the decline in America.
How can legal marijuana hurt society?
Some of you will argue, but as long as I don't hurt anybody else, it's okay. WRONG! You hurt society as a whole, slowly but surely you do.
I didn't say anything about legal marijuana.
So? 50 years ago they could shown Elvis shake his hips, and you couldn't even say the word "Pregnant." Besides, censorship is one of the banes on our society today. Ever hear of the facist CONSERVATIVE group the PTC.
You can turn on a TV and see stuff that would have gotten you arrested fifty years ago.
I don't want it to be exactly like fifty years ago. Admittedly, some laxity is good but I'm talking about the promiscuous sex, violence and mindless garbage.
Drug use, bastard children, and crack babies I could see, but divorce and abortion can be for a good reason.
Drug use is up, divorce rate is way up, illegitimate babies, crack babies, abortion, what's happened?
Divorce is a symptom of the dissintegrating nuclear family and the decline of family values. This is not a good thing.
And guess what? Down south a little CONSERVATIVE group called the Ku Klux Klan controls some of the courts, and they have a similar idea about whites.
Now we have this whole victimization movement where liberals argue that people, (especially minorities), aren't responsible for crimes they commit because they're just victims of society or victims of being born black/hispanic/whatever.
The days of the KKK controlling anything are over. They faded years ago.
You make it sound like everyone agrees with what they say.
Then you also get all the liberal demagogues and "poverty pimps" like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. They go around like leaches, attaching to a popular issue and lying their corrupt hearts out, saying whatever the crowd wants to hear.
Many do. Companies throw money at them so they'll go away. That's why they're nothing but demagogues. They get their cash and then all of a sudden it's not an issue anymore. I call it legalized extortion.
A conservative society would be the best way to ensure self destruction of a society. Dude, if you want to whine about how "Liberalism is bad!" go read up on some famous conservatives like Richard Nixon, Joseph McCarthy, and John Ashcroft! Why anyone would want to belong to the party for those three is beyond me.
We need to return to a more conservative, more responsible society before we self-destruct.
Hmmm, you mean some famous Republicans like Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, Colin Powell, Dwight Eisenhower, etc.
And then you have some wonderful Democrats, Al "Sore Loserman" Gore, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton "aka Slick Willie", Tom Daschle, Jesse Jackson, etc.
Yeah, Nixon had a cover-up and shredded documents. At least he had the guts to resign. Clinton lied, then was forced by the evidence to tell the truth and then thumbed his nose at decency by not taking the honotable way out for a lying perjurer, resignation. He's a disgrace.
And don't get me started on Gore...
If there's a Black History Month (February), then why isn't there a White History Month? I'm not being racist, I just wonder about the whole multicultural movement. If we want equality, then why isn't there a white history month?
Of course, if you made one, then you'd be considered racist, yet somehow Black History Month isn't.
At 3/4/02 05:36 PM, dagger_happy wrote:Life is still essentially random and meaningless. Woah! That sounded depressing didn't it?That is your opinion.
Well, it doesn't really depress me, I was just anticipating what others might say. I can hardly see any reason for reality having a unifying guide or reason. Of course, many people make such things up when they are not there because they crave the stability of knowing they will go to heaven where their shitty lives will be rewarded. Great, huh? Besides, wouldn't eternal bliss and fulfillment get boring after a while? The very sensation of pleasure is just the release of endomorphines in the brain.
From a scientific standpoint, God would most likely be a sort of extradimensional consciousness able to possess omnipotent power because he exists in super-spacetime, the higher non-domensional plane on which the quantum decisions take place and wave functions break, determining the course of our personal reality as in the MWI interpretation of quantum physics. Heaven would probably be that non-dimensional realm, any sort of human defintions and/or experience would have no comparison just as the laws of classical mechanics break down at a singularity point. In other words, you can't describe it. The extra dimensions used to create the parallel realities of MWI branch off at right angles to our four, length, width, depth and time. How do you picture time branching at right angles to the three dimesnions of space? It is very hard, these extra infinite dimensions are impossible to describe. What I'm essentially saying is that your narrow ethereal, earthly descriptions cannot begin to allow you any frame of reference to understand this. You can't judge these things on earthly terms.
At 3/3/02 08:33 AM, Slizor wrote:
There is a distinct singular American culture - stupidity.
Coming from a Brit. Hmmm, let's think of some of the things the stupid Americans have done for science, art, politics and technology: First modern democracy, invented telephone, invented personal computers, invented internet, invented airplane, invented light bulb, etc. Writers such as Hemingway, Steinbeck, Kerouac, Melville, Twain, Poe, etc. And the list goes on.
The vast majority of the rich in this country did inherit their wealth.
No, they earned it, at least in America.
A nation taxing itself is a paradox.
Not really. Liberals in the government want to raise taxes on the people to pay for their misguided, self-serving social programs.
Evidence refutes conservatism.
I can sense the oozing hypocrisy.
The Earth's eco-system is fragile.
The Earth's eco-system is pretty robust. When Mt. Pinotubo exploded in the Pacific, it released about as much pollution as humanity has, ever. Did the Earth curl up and die? No, it absorbs shocks like that, including the massive heap of bad science that attributes global warming to humans. Not even a meteor that blocked out the sun killed it, the one that killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
The most beautiful thing about a tree is the fact it supplies the world with oxygen.
I think it makes a nice table too.
Ronald Reagan was a twathead.
Ahhh, yes. The intellectual last resort. Call him a "twathead." It says more about you than him.
The 1980s was a decade of greed.
It was a decade of great economic gain. i.e. the home computing industry, etc.
Poverty is the root ("rut") cause of crime. Also greed.
Being poor doesn't make you a criminal.
There's a simple way to solve the crime problem: equality.
I agree.
If you make something illegal, it's illegal.
Whoa, that might be a little obvious, ya think?
The way to improve our schools is better teachers and buildings.
And increased accountability.
I am arrogant
You said it, not me.
There is no God.
That's your opinion.
There is something wrong when critics say the problem
with America is too much religion. The propaganda machine is broken.
It means that family values and morals that held this country together are declining.
Morality is bollocks, ethics is what you want.
Morality is the key. Ethics is just a code.
The only way conservatives win national elections is by doing things the liberal way, piling on money.
They win through the power of their ideals.
Feminism was established to right for equality, it lost its aims.
I agree. The femi-nazis aren't about equality anymore.
"Follow the money." is the main conservative tenet.
And the money leads right to democrats.
Conservatives attempt through judicial activism when they cannot stuff the ballot box.
I think the Florida 2000 fiasco shows just who tries to use the courts to get what they can't get fairly, liberals. Al "Sore Loserman" Gore nearly stole the election.
Progress is achieving economic justice and fairness.
Capital is not democratic. It recognizes growth or loss only.
Conservatives measure compassion by how much money they have.
They measure compassion by how much people learn to think and depend on themselves, not government handouts.
Justice is the new word for war.
When the situation calls for it.
"Winners" are idiots.
So then losing is smart?
Words mean things, accept when Conservatives say them.
Coming from a liberal, I 'd expect nothing less.
Too many Americans can't laugh at themselves anymore.
True.
Peace does mean the elimination of nuclear weapons.
But that will never happen, at least not in the near future.
Peace does mean the absence of war.
Fair enough.
War is stupid. It leads to a world governed by the aggressive use of force.
Or to a world kept in order by the justified use of calculated force.
Peace continues to threaten the world.
So if peace threatens, then war...? Wait, you just said war is stupid but you then say peace is a threat. So you want stupidity?
Communism is the future.
Communism is a failed dream of the past
The US imposes itself on the peoples of other nations.
In some ways yes, but necessarily.
Freedom is there, can't you see?
Yes it is. Can you?
To stupid peoples, peace means the absence of threats and the presence of justice.
So what is peace to smart people then?
The Peace Movement in the US, whether by accident or design, is pro-Communist. Which makes sense.
Yes, they're both misguided idealists.
The collective propoganda and wisdom of seasoned citizens is the most potent, yet untapped, resource our young-people have.
True.
There is such a thing as war atrocities. War is an atrocity, but it is waged by people.
There is war, and there is really bad war.
Abortion is there.
Doesn't make it right.
The US will again go to war.
Yes we will.
To more and more people, a violent US is a sinful US. The US is frightening and ominous.
Only to envious weaker nations.
You should thank God if you're not American.
You should thank god for all the times America has saved the Europe or the world, WWI, WWII, Cold War, etc. BTW, you say you're atheist yet then you say thank God ?
A giant sheep in the sky has as much supporting evidence as God.
God is supported on faith, not evidence.
At 3/4/02 01:41 AM, Biseor wrote: I know how all you liberal Nazi's in this forum love my work so dearly, so today I bring to you my newest work...
I take a look at the newfound lying, cheating, extortionist, racist, black "Civil Rights" movement in America!
Always at Biseor's Madness
Exactly, many so called civil rights leaders are just demagogues or worse, black racists.
If somebody's black, hey, I've never owned slaves you've never been one, let's move on.
At 3/4/02 05:16 PM, dagger_happy wrote:There is a difference between good and evil. They are standards set by society. Good is something beneficial to the society. Evil is something detrimental to the society or a part of it. If I shot you, that would be bad. If I helped you find a job when you were broke, that would be good. There is a difference, standards can change but there is a difference.
That is true in black and white cases like that, but you will often find what is a "good" action for one person will hurt another. Such as the creation of a Jewish State, Israel. True, it was good for the Jews, but what about the Palestinians who are kicked out of their own homes and treated like second-class citizens? Of course there are blatantly negative actions in civilisation and positive ones, but that is how we define them in our minds. It does not mean that higher spiritual forces should be guiding events.
I never said it was all black and white. I recognize that there are shades of gray.
:Life is still essentially random and meaningless. Woah! That sounded depressing didn't it?
That is your opinion.
At 3/4/02 03:50 PM, BlueHairedPunk wrote: Hey, Commander. You're a dirty fucking hypocrite, and do you know why? Do you remember creating a post that said, "the state should not control your life"? Hey, look at that, you're a moron.
The state should stay out of your life for the most part but there must be laws since people can't manage themselves yet. For example, murder is illegal, you might say that is the state running your life but there moust be a compromise between public safety and individual rights. I think the state should:
1) Protect others: no murder, fraud, drunk driving, etc.
2) Protect you: safety standards: etc.
3) Protect the nation: national defense, etc.
4) Protect the economy: trade deals, tariffs, etc.
Beyond that, it should leave you alone.
Abortion falls under protecting others. An unborn child is future life that should be given a chance. That future person should be protected from harm before he can even defend himself. I've answered all these comments about a fetus being "non-life" before so CHECK MY EARLIER POSTS ON THIS PAGE!
At 3/4/02 03:28 PM, BlueHairedPunk wrote: "At 3/3/02 11:35 PM, Commander-K25 wrote:
Back to the topic, liberalism: Democrats: We've got what it takes to take what you got.Are you some kind of retard? You DO realize that both Democrats AND Republicans are BOTH LIBERALS! Liberalism is what this country is based upon: personal liberty and private property. "Liberalism" does not mean just Nader and co. "Liberalism" INCLUDES your precious Rush Limbaugh. And to institute (or try) Communism, it's almost impossible to do it out of greed. Stalin wasn't TRYING to create Communism, and neither were his cronies. And props to whoever it was that said there are other Communists besides Stalinists. Thank you. Thank you Slizor, too. And just because someone's an atheist or young or from another country doesn't mean that their opinion is any less valid. Get that into your thick skulls.
Communism will work when love, not greed, inspires it."
Another definition: free. not literal or strict, as a liberal interpretation of the Constitution.
You see, this is what Democrats have, a more liberal interpretation of the laws and Constitution and conservatives want to follow and interpret the laws more closely.
There is more than one solid definition. When I refer to liberals, I mean Democrats and other left wingers who want to socialize things. Conservatives want more individual responsibility and power.
And as to Stalin, I agree that the USSR quickly became a fascist-like totalitarian state but that's what happens when communism is tried. Stalin didn't found the USSR, Lenin, trotsky and the Bolsheviks did, but as it always does, any pure, or near pure, communistic system is quickly seized by a greedy dictator like Stalin. That is why it doesn't work, that and the failure of motivation for the workers, because there's not enough incentive to work.
I agree with communism in theory, it is perfect, but we don't live in a perfect world, do we?
At 3/4/02 04:22 PM, dagger_happy wrote:
If there was no evil, how would you discern the good? Deus vult, Deus vobiscum.
There is no evil, there is no good. They are subjective terms that people like to split their perceptions of the world into. When WW1 began, both sides claimed to have God vouching for them and that the other was "evil". It was, of course, ridiculous propaganda and self-delusion on the part of the leaders. Good and evil don't even come into it.
"For there is nothing good or bad but thinking makes it so" - Hamlet.
There is a difference between good and evil. They are standards set by society. Good is something beneficial to the society. Evil is something detrimental to the society or a part of it. If I shot you, that would be bad. If I helped you find a job when you were broke, that would be good. There is a difference, standards can change but there is a difference.
And all across the land, the people chanted:
PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2 PS2
BTW, MGS2 is a great game, it may not have a massive amount of gameplay but the intricate storyline, great strategy and action is worth it. The ending is cryptic enough not to bore you and leaves tanatlizing questions. Plus all the bonuses, hidden features and various challenges and difficulty levels keep you coming back. I'm replaying it just to try and get all the guards' dog tags.
Back to the topic, liberalism. Some thoughts:
"And ye shall throw money at the problem..."
-Liberal Bible
"And ye shall tax thy populace as oft as ye want..."
-Liberal Bible
"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."
-Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965).
"It isn't that liberals are ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
-Ronald Reagan.
"...they make men small, cowardly and hedonistic--every time it is the herd animal that triumphs with them. Liberalism: In other words, herd-animalization."
-Friedrich Nietzsche - Twilight of the Idols, Ch. 38, para. 1
Democrats: We've got what it takes to take what you got.
Communism will work when love, not greed, inspires it.
At 3/3/02 10:18 PM, TFX wrote: Unix for raw power.
Linux for web serving.
Mac for graphics.
Windows for everything else.
Windows, you can't deny it.
Website questions:
1) How do you update things like your NG level?
2) How do you get an active status in the club?
At 3/3/02 10:05 PM, G-Hawk wrote: I bet you were Intrigued by the topic, WEREN'T you?
I'M STARTING A REVOLUTION AGAINST THESE CAM SLUTS.
If you wanna Join, Then Reply to this Post saying which Cam Girl you wanna Target. Personally I wanna demolish all of them, But you do it.
Which Cam Girls do you hate? Ooh, I hate All of them.
(Yes...I'm quite bored.)
Another Anime Girls? I don't think so.
At 3/3/02 03:17 PM, Slizor wrote:
So if I quoted pro-palestinian sources like you, then that wouldn't be biased? Liberals, they just don't get it.Mine wasn't pro-palestinian at all, it's a English newspaper, http://www.guardianunliited.co.uk .
And neither are mine, they're often posted on so-called pro-israel sites but they're from publications like the New York Times, the Washingtion Post and first-hand accounts. Read the sources of each point in that article.
At 3/3/02 03:08 PM, Slizor wrote:
Communism is the equal distribution of poverty. (Except for the rich corrupt leaders like Stalin, Mao Tse-Dong, etc.)See, you're showing that the communist states have not had equality, because communism is equality then it is a paradox(equality state = inequality) so we end up coming to the conclusion that it was infact not an equality state, and therefore not communism.
I agree that the USSR and others were not true communism, true communism is perfection, a utopia, but like any idealistic idea, it is only a dream. Communism works in theory but any time that it is attempted to implement it, the theory falls apart as greedy leaders take control of it. In theory it works, but theory is not enough.
Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth.
Communism is the equal distribution of poverty. (Except for the rich corrupt leaders like Stalin, Mao Tse-Dong, etc.)
Slizor is:
1) British.
2) Just left of Stalin.
3) Refuses to acknowledge commonly known facts, i.e. communism has been tried and it has failed. It only works with social insects.
4) Atheist.
5) Hypocritical, criticising bias while being biased himself.
I think these things account for just about anything he says.
At 3/3/02 07:58 AM, Slizor wrote:
Source: www.aipac.org/documents/aipacfacts3.htmlWow! You didn't even read the site I sent you to, did you? It's about biased sources and I think, you may have just managed to find one, a extremely biased source that is. You're quoting from a pro-Israel lobby, are you just plain thick?
""We can't accept Clinton's ideas as a basis for future negotiations or a future settlement. Clinton didn't take (Palestinian leader, Yasser) Arafat's reservations into account, and these ideas don't offer our people their legitimate rights," stated senior Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Korei."
(2001 Guardian)
This source is about possibly the most progressive peace plan(that was not from an arab state) and it doesn't even recognise Palestinian rights, there have been a thousand other peace plans, all seeped in Israeli rejectionism.
So if I quoted pro-palestinian sources like you, then that wouldn't be biased? Liberals, they just don't get it.
At 3/3/02 07:44 AM, Slizor wrote:
Whoah, rabid liberal alert. I'm not posting those because I think they shouldn't carry guns, I'm posting those so that Slizor might finally admit that Palestinian kids do more than throw rocks. They have a right to have guns and when provoked, Israelis have a right to shoot back at them. The purpose of the photos was simply to say, they have guns too, not to say that carrying guns should be prohibited. Don't make up things that I never said or intended.You clearly stated that the Israelis only shoot at people with guns, the quote clearly shows that they were shooting at people without guns, saying that some palestinian children do have guns is irrelevant and contradicts your original statement.
No, this quote says that they have guns and are dangerous. If in that one incident you witnessed, an Israeli shot at some rock-throwing kids then that is tragic. Perhaps, they were only carrying rocks but when it is a fact that they're incited to violence by they're parents, encouraged to martyr themselves and many are known to carry weapons, you can hardly blame Israeli soldiers for being a little nervous.
If you wish to read a more in-depth look at where the real responsibility lies for children's deaths, go here: http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp441.htm
You will hardly read it all, and then you will declare it to be biased as you declare everything to be, despite the fact it was written by an international human rights lawyer, but I feel I should post it anyway.
If you don't read it all, then at least read the conclusion:
-------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion and Outlook
It is unquestionably a tragedy when children fall victim to the Al-Aqsa intifada, but the blame for this tragedy does not rest with the IDF. The tragic reality is that children, often of primary school age, man the intifada's first line of offense. They are incited by the Palestinian leadership, from Arafat on down, to begin riots, burn tires, throw together roadblocks, toss Molotov cocktails and stones, and function as a smokescreen between armed Palestinian gunmen and the IDF. The Western public must ask why are Palestinian educated to hate and place themselves in harm's way? The answer: many Palestinian activists, such as Tanzim leader Hussein a-Sheikh, believe that gains in future negotiations will be greater following the riots, which have made the Palestinians victims in the eyes of the world. In the words of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elie Weisel:
Those of us who reject hatred and fanaticism as options, who consider peace as the noblest of efforts, finally recognize Yasser Arafat for what he is: ignorant, devious and unworthy of trust. We had hoped for a genuine peace between Israeli and Palestinian children playing together, studying together, laughing together, and discovering each other's worlds. The pain, the agony, the death of any child, Palestinian or Jewish, is a torment to us. But why does Chairman Arafat not protect them but instead uses them as shields for adults throwing stones and worse?
Thus it is not the IDF, but rather the Palestinian leadership, which should ultimately be held responsible for the injury and death among their rioting children.
Israeli society revolves around the family. Jews as a people have always placed paramount emphasis on improving the lives of their children, and not only their own children. Israelis and Jews everywhere therefore deeply regret that Palestinian children have been caught up in the recent violence.
Imagine how much less powerful Palestinian propaganda would be without cynically sacrificing children in front of the television cameras. What if Arafat set an example for the Palestinian political and religious leadership by exhorting the youth to press their views via non-violent protest -- candlelight vigils, sit-ins, peaceful marches, petitions, and the like? Regrettably, despite the fact that Israel earnestly sought to reach a final peace agreement with the PLO, he and they chose incitement, blood, smoke and gunfire, bringing on the cataclysm which is swallowing young lives and the peace process whole.
-------------------------------------------------------
How do you join the BLAM club?
And if it's hard facts you want, then here's some proof that Arafat wants war and Israeli destuction, not peace. (I urge you to read it all before posting.)
AIPAC Facts: Israel Intercepts Terrorists Arafat Refuses to Arrest
Since September, Palestinian terrorists have carried out more than 6,000 terror attacks and detonated 81 suicide bombs. They have killed 134 Israelis—nearly 75 percent of them civilians—and wounded 1,338 others.
The Tanzim and Force 17, under the authority of Arafat, have played key roles in encouraging and perpetrating these attacks.
The Tanzim: Fatah’s Fighters on the Ground*
The Tanzim (“organization” in Arabic) is the militia of Fatah, Arafat’s own faction within the PLO. The Tanzim is composed of thousands of activists, armed with illegal weapons. Instructed by Fatah, Arafat’s political faction, the Tanzim initiates and organizes armed confrontations with Israeli soldiers and attacks upon Israeli civilians. Marwan Barghouti, a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council and the Tanzim’s commander in the West Bank, has been “the driving force behind” terror attacks that have continued despite the Palestinians’ agreement to a U.S-brokered cease-fire plan. (The Jerusalem Post, July 18, 2001)
The Tanzim has played a leading role in the past 10 months of violence, carrying out ambushes of civilian vehicles and bombings within Israeli cities. Its members are equipped with mortars, assault rifles, AK-47s, heavy machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and deadly explosives. (All of these weapons are held illegally and are banned by the Oslo accords) The Tanzim, based in Ramallah, has branches in every Palestinian neighborhood, village, refugee camp and high school in the West Bank. Its strongest branches operate within the universities—students from Bethlehem, Bir Zeit and Nablus universities have been at the forefront of violent demonstrations and confrontations.
Force 17: Institutionalized Palestinian Terror**
Force 17 (officially called Amn al-Ri’asah or Presidential Security Service) is an elite unit of the PA security forces under the direct control of Arafat. As originally defined in the Oslo accords, the force is supposed to deal primarily with the protection of Chairman Arafat as well as other political personalities and important installations. However, Force 17 has played a prominent role in orchestrating terrorist attacks. This group, the closest and most loyal of Arafat’s forces, is comprised of 3,500 operatives and is headed by Faisel Abu-Sharch in Gaza and Mahmoud Damra in the West Bank.
Force 17 is equipped with mortars, assault rifles, AK-47s, heavy machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and BRDM-2 armored vehicles.
Unlike the Tanzim, which is composed entirely of locals who are well rooted in Palestinian society in the West Bank and Gaza, Force 17 officers returned to Palestinian territory from Tunisia with Arafat in 1994 and lack local ties in the West Bank and Gaza.
The Tanzim has played a leading role in the past 10 months of Palestinian terror against Israelis, including carrying out ambushes of civilian vehicles and bombings in Israeli cities. (Report by the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism)
Ten-month-old baby girl Shalhevet Pass was targeted and killed by a Tanzim sniper. (Jerusalem Post, March 28, 2001)
Yasser Mohammad Abed Rabya and Imad Daoud Hacine, members of the Tanzim, were responsible for the June 12 shooting of a Greek Orthodox Monk in the West Bank. (Jerusalem Post, July 18, 2001)
The Tanzim claimed responsibility for the murder of Aharon Abidian, a kashrut supervisor, who was shot repeatedly at point-blank range while shopping. (Jerusalem Post, July 3, 2001)
The Tanzim claimed responsibility for the murder of Lt. Col. Yehuda Edri, who was shot in the head at point-blank range. (Jerusalem Post, June 15, 2001)
In January, four Tanzim activists abducted and then executed two Israelis eating lunch in a restaurant in Tul Karm. (Ha’aretz, April 9, 2001)
In flyers circulated in Tul Karm, the Tanzim claimed responsibility for the killing of Eliahu Na’aman on the Green Line near Suieka. (Ha’aretz, July 6, 2001)
Fighting around Joseph’s Tomb started as dozens of Palestinian demonstrators, including members of the Tanzim and armed PA policemen, hurled stones and Molotov cocktails at the Israeli enclave, where a small group of border policemen and IDF soldiers were stationed. (Ha’aretz, October 2, 2000)
Even before the outbreak of violence there were grounds for concern over the activities of some Fatah elements. For example, Fatah and the PA sponsored “summer camps” where up to 30,000 Palestinian youngsters were taught how to handle weapons and guerrilla warfare tactics by Tanzim instructors. (State Department’s PLO Commitments Compliance Act Report)
“Arafat’s security detail, known as Force 17, has been involved in attacks, and has formed relationships with groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, the Lebanese-based guerrilla organization.” (The Washington Post, April 30, 2001)
-Force 17 Commander Talal Naasan claimed responsibility for attacking Israeli soldiers and civilian Israeli cars. (United Press International, April 23, 2001)
-Israeli military officials attributed the introduction of mortar capability in large measure to Massoud Ayyad, a lieutenant colonel in Arafat’s Force 17 security force. (Los Angeles Times, April 10, 2001)
-The Israel Defense Forces arrested seven Palestinians suspected of involved in shootings against Israeli targets in the Nablus and Ramallah regions. A senior security source said that all those arrested are members of Force 17. (Ha’aretz, May 18, 2001)
-A “work accident,” the premature explosion of a bomb being prepared, occurred in the official offices of Force 17 in Ramallah. (Ha’aretz, April 20, 2001)
-Israel’s security forces arrested members of a Palestinian cell, many of whom belong to Force 17, suspected of killing seven Israelis and injuring 20 others. (Ha’aretz, January 28, 2001)
*Ronni Shaked, “Yediot Ahronoth”, Oct 3, 2000, p. B8.
**Reuven Paz, International Policy Center for Counter Terrorism (visiting fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy).
Source: www.aipac.org/documents/aipacfacts3.html
At 3/2/02 05:20 PM, dagger_happy wrote:Some of you will argue, but as long as I don't hurt anybody else, it's okay. WRONG! You hurt society as a whole, slowly but surely you do. You can turn on a TV and see stuff that would have gotten you arrested fifty years ago. Drug use is up, divorce rate is way up, illegitimate babies, crack babies, abortion, what's happened?
I totally agree. Lets go back to the good old days when homosexuals were imprisoned, arseholes like McArthur could acculmulate power by starting witchhunts for non-existent communists and, most importantly of all, the black man knew his place! Or maybe not...
Your blessed country was never morally better than it is now. The media is slightly less biased and more representative these days; well, it's getting there.
As you usual, you people really know how to take things out of context. When I kade the comment about "fifty years ago" it was just as a point of comparison. I don't wish it were 1952 nor do I think we need to revisit that era. What I'm saying is we need moral reform, not racism, not descrimination, but moral reform. And by the way, it was McCarthy, not McArthur, and no I don't want communist witchhunts. Morality, America is beginning to lack it.
And about the media, it is more biased, now it is liberally biased, except for Fox News.
At 3/2/02 04:55 PM, dagger_happy wrote:Pure semantics. Maybe I've misused the word but what I mean is thinking, rational, intelligent beings capable of higher thought and self-consciousness.
So you're saying that a fetus is capable of rational, "higher thought and self-consciousness"? I disagree. It may be physically "alive" but its mind is not. The fact that it moves and twiches during the abortion precedure can be equated to reflexes, but not real psychological awareness or understanding. Is killing a bird the same as smashing one of its eggs?
Have you even read my earlier posts? I've already answered this question several times. Fetuses aren't intelligent but they have the potential to become so. Life should not be denied them before they can experience it. Read a topic through before posting with incomplete information, asking questions that have already been asked more than once and answered more than once.
At 3/2/02 06:34 PM, Slizor wrote:
This leads to some sort of kids website about the USSR. How is this relevant?It actually leads to basic source evaluation, something you need.
By the way, Slizor, here's some more "harmless" Palestinian kids. Check my last few posts on the first page for more.The photo is elligable(sp), and please stop bothering me with your mindless propogangda.
Mindless propoganda? Maybe it is propoganda but some that needs to be shown. A picture is worth a thousand words. I could describe and tell all I want but until they see it, some just won't believe.
(More Palestinian children being trained in violence and hate.)
At 3/2/02 09:31 PM, Anarchy_Penguin wrote:At 3/2/02 12:00 PM, Commander-K25 wrote: Another "harmless", "unarmed", Palestinian kid.THOSE BASTARDS!
They can have guns?
What complete idiocy!
They allow people to walk around with guns? Why rush limbaugh would never allow that in America! It's not like you're hypocritically attacking people in other nations exercising rights that you defend in your nation or anything.
Whoah, rabid liberal alert. I'm not posting those because I think they shouldn't carry guns, I'm posting those so that Slizor might finally admit that Palestinian kids do more than throw rocks. They have a right to have guns and when provoked, Israelis have a right to shoot back at them. The purpose of the photos was simply to say, they have guns too, not to say that carrying guns should be prohibited. Don't make up things that I never said or intended.
It's time for some moral reform in America. We've degenerated a lot over the past few decades, especially since the 60's. That's where a lot of it started, leftist hippies who's idea of morality was, "If it feels good, do it."
Some of you will argue, but as long as I don't hurt anybody else, it's okay. WRONG! You hurt society as a whole, slowly but surely you do. You can turn on a TV and see stuff that would have gotten you arrested fifty years ago. Drug use is up, divorce rate is way up, illegitimate babies, crack babies, abortion, what's happened?
Now we have this whole victimization movement where liberals argue that people, (especially minorities), aren't responsible for crimes they commit because they're just victims of society or victims of being born black/hispanic/whatever.
Then you also get all the liberal demagogues and "pverty pimps" like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. They go around like leaches, attaching to a popular issue and lying their corrupt hearts out, saying whatever the crowd wants to hear.
We need to return to a more conservative, more responsible society before we self-destruct.
News Flash:
JERUSALEM -- An apparent suicide bomber detonated a powerful explosive in an ultra-Orthodox neighborhood in Jerusalem on Saturday night, killing at least six people and wounding more than 30 as residents left synagogues and returned to the streets at the end of the Jewish sabbath, police said.
"This has nothing to do with warfare, this nothing to do with national liberation, this has to do with the murder of innocent Jews, coming back from their evening prayers," said Israeli government spokesman Dore Gold. "The state of Israel knows how to defend the people of Israel, and will do so."
At 3/2/02 06:27 AM, Slizor wrote:
This is all at least partially true but, so what? He is writing about things nearly a century ago and conflict between great empires hasn't arisen yet, (probably between US and China next.)Can you not remember WW2? The Cold War?
What I mean is conflicts today. WWII and the Cold War are history. I'm looking ahead.
Right now the conflict is between the empire and the metaphorical barbarians, terrorists. Empires go through cycles of history. We, the USA are practically the new Rome. We're the dominant power and the "great empire" of the present day. Just as Rome was threatened by barbarian invasion, that is less advanced, opporunistic forces, so we are also threatened by terrorism that at the current moment may not take down the empire but it is a threat.Totally off-point.
In essence, Lenin's writings are dated, although they will eventually become relevant again in a few centuries.There may not be any empires now, but money is becoming more concentrated and there are still instances of imperalism.
Also, just FYI, socialism/communism doesn't work. It's been tried more than a few times and is probably the most disasterous social experiment ever.Oh yeah? Like where?
Hmmmmm, like the USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, Cambodia, Eastern Europe, Vietnam and all those hippie communes in the 60's. Are any of those places free or prospering?
