Discussion:
nbc Without a doubt...Ya gotta love Israel nbc
(too old to reply)
Joe
2007-12-09 16:30:55 UTC
Permalink
LOL...possibly one of the funniest things I've read...
Not only have the Israelis stolen all the land...
Now they're illegally occupying FACEBOOK
You gotta love them Israelis
They don't miss a trick :-)


Syria blocks Facebook access, citing Israeli 'infiltration'
The Associated Press
Friday, December 7, 2007

DAMASCUS, Syria: Syrian authorities have blocked Facebook, the popular
Internet hangout, over what seems to be fears of Israeli
"infiltration" of Syrian social networks on the Net, according to
residents and media reports.

Residents of Damascus said that they have not been able to enter
Facebook for more than two weeks. An Associated Press reporter got a
blank page when he tried to open Facebook's home page Friday from the
Syrian capital.

Syrian officials were not available for comment Friday because of the
Muslim weekend, but some reports have suggested that the ban was
intended to prevent Israeli users from infiltrating Syrian social
networks.

Lebanon's daily As-Safir reported that Facebook was blocked on Nov.
18. It said the authorities took the step because Israelis have been
entering Syria-based groups.

Human rights groups have regularly criticized Syrian authorities for
blocking opposition sites and Internet sites critical of President
Bashar Assad's government.

Former President Hafez Assad's death in 2000 after three decades of
authoritarian rule raised hopes of a freer society under his British-
educated son and successor.

But the younger Assad cracked down on political opponents and human
rights activists, putting many of them in jail.
Derek Homsberg
2007-12-09 16:45:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
LOL...possibly one of the funniest things I've read...
Not only have the Israelis stolen all the land...
Now they're illegally occupying FACEBOOK
You gotta love them Israelis
They don't miss a trick :-)
Although the article states in several places that the Syrians have shut
down facebook to prevent Israelis from infiltrating it, nowhere does the
article address whether in fact Israelis are infiltrating it. I was looking
for some explanation of why the Israelis would do this, but it's not there.
The article is entirely based upon "reports" about why the Syrians have shut
it down.
Joe
2007-12-09 16:59:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Derek Homsberg
Although the article states in several places that the Syrians have shut
down facebook to prevent Israelis from infiltrating it, nowhere does the
article address whether in fact Israelis are infiltrating it. I was looking
for some explanation of why the Israelis would do this, but it's not there.
The article is entirely based upon "reports" about why the Syrians have shut
it down.
Perhaps its because the Israelis are doing nothing, and are being
blamed for doing everything. Sort of like everyday life..

Facebook...lol...this is priceless...
D***@aol.com
2007-12-09 20:46:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by Derek Homsberg
Although the article states in several places that the Syrians have shut
down facebook to prevent Israelis from infiltrating it, nowhere does the
article address whether in fact Israelis are infiltrating it. �I was looking
for some explanation of why the Israelis would do this, but it's not there.
The article is entirely based upon "reports" about why the Syrians have shut
it down.
Perhaps its because the Israelis are doing nothing, and are being
blamed for doing everything. Sort of like everyday life..
Facebook...lol...this is priceless...
Isn't Global Warming caused by the Israeli's also??? : )

Peace,
Debbie
A to Z
2007-12-09 20:48:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Derek Homsberg
Although the article states in several places that the Syrians have shut
down facebook to prevent Israelis from infiltrating it, nowhere does the
article address whether in fact Israelis are infiltrating it. ?I was
looking
for some explanation of why the Israelis would do this, but it's not there.
The article is entirely based upon "reports" about why the Syrians have shut
it down.
Perhaps its because the Israelis are doing nothing, and are being
blamed for doing everything. Sort of like everyday life..
Facebook...lol...this is priceless...
Isn't Global Warming caused by the Israeli's also??? : )
they certainly generate a lot of heat - and hot air - around here


Peace,
Debbie
Joe
2007-12-09 21:03:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
Isn't Global Warming caused by the Israeli's also??? : )
Peace,
Debbie
Teenage pregnancy also :-)
m***@gmail.com
2007-12-09 22:20:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by D***@aol.com
Isn't Global Warming caused by the Israeli's also??? : )
Peace,
Debbie
Teenage pregnancy also :-)
AIDS is an Israeli plot, someone said. Just to be safe, maybe we
oughta brand all of 'em with tattoos on their arms. Call it a
Huckabee.
Joe
2007-12-09 22:58:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
AIDS is an Israeli plot, someone said. Just to be safe, maybe we
oughta brand all of 'em with tattoos on their arms. Call it a
Huckabee.
It is amazing, and oh so historically consistent over the eons, that
they're viewed as responsible for just about every problem on planet
earth :-)
gumboman
2007-12-09 23:19:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by m***@gmail.com
AIDS is an Israeli plot, someone said. Just to be safe, maybe we
oughta brand all of 'em with tattoos on their arms. Call it a
Huckabee.
It is amazing, and oh so historically consistent over the eons, that
they're viewed as responsible for just about every problem on planet
earth :-)
If you believe that to be true why do you think that is?


JH
D***@aol.com
2007-12-10 00:55:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Joe
Post by m***@gmail.com
AIDS is an Israeli plot, someone said. Just to be safe, maybe we
oughta brand all of 'em with tattoos on their arms. Call it a
Huckabee.
It is amazing, and oh so historically consistent over the eons, that
they're viewed as responsible for just about every problem on planet
earth :-)
If you believe that to be true why do you think that is?
JH
Ummm..because everyone needs a scape goat now and then? Not that
Israeli is an innocent country like the good ole U.S. of A.of
course.....but more importantly...why do YOU think that is???

Peace,
Debbie
gumboman
2007-12-10 03:48:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by gumboman
Post by Joe
Post by m***@gmail.com
AIDS is an Israeli plot, someone said. Just to be safe, maybe we
oughta brand all of 'em with tattoos on their arms. Call it a
Huckabee.
It is amazing, and oh so historically consistent over the eons, that
they're viewed as responsible for just about every problem on planet
earth :-)
If you believe that to be true why do you think that is?
JH
Ummm..because everyone needs a scape goat now and then? Not that
Israeli is an innocent country like the good ole U.S. of A.of
course.....but more importantly...why do YOU think that is???
Peace,
Debbie
Couldn't tell you. I've come in contact with more Jewish people on
this board than what I probably had in all my years previous to this.
I had a small familiarity with their history but that's about it. Now,
I know a lot of Mexicans, Italians and so on, plenty of mixed breeds
like myself but I suppose there simply weren't a lot of Jews around
where I grew up and lived. I'm sure they are around but I don't know
many of them so it was just never a discussion topic for me.

I basically go by what I see today and I personally think it's pretty
ugly which is why I think the US should remove itself from the
situation. When folks around here have asked me to read particular
pieces I've always done so but I can't say that anything has really
changed my mind that it's a bad business for the US to be involved
with that kind of subjugation of one group in favor of another.

If what Joe says is true though it's almost statistically impossible
for every single outside group on the planet to decide to use the same
scapegoat unless some other forces are at work. What do YOU think are
those forces?


JH
RJH
2007-12-10 23:14:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by gumboman
Post by Joe
Post by m***@gmail.com
AIDS is an Israeli plot, someone said. Just to be safe, maybe we
oughta brand all of 'em with tattoos on their arms. Call it a
Huckabee.
It is amazing, and oh so historically consistent over the eons, that
they're viewed as responsible for just about every problem on planet
earth :-)
If you believe that to be true why do you think that is?
JH
Ummm..because everyone needs a scape goat now and then? Not that
Israeli is an innocent country like the good ole U.S. of A.of
course.....but more importantly...why do YOU think that is???
Peace,
Debbie
Couldn't tell you. I've come in contact with more Jewish people on
this board than what I probably had in all my years previous to this.
I had a small familiarity with their history but that's about it. Now,
I know a lot of Mexicans, Italians and so on, plenty of mixed breeds
like myself but I suppose there simply weren't a lot of Jews around
where I grew up and lived. I'm sure they are around but I don't know
many of them so it was just never a discussion topic for me.
I basically go by what I see today and I personally think it's pretty
ugly which is why I think the US should remove itself from the
situation. When folks around here have asked me to read particular
pieces I've always done so but I can't say that anything has really
changed my mind that it's a bad business for the US to be involved
with that kind of subjugation of one group in favor of another.
If what Joe says is true though it's almost statistically impossible
for every single outside group on the planet to decide to use the same
scapegoat unless some other forces are at work. What do YOU think are
those forces?
JH
It's called racism. Racism is born from ignorance and jealousy.
Which is it for you? My bet is on the ignorance.
gumboman
2007-12-11 03:19:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by RJH
It's called racism. Racism is born from ignorance and jealousy.
Which is it for you? My bet is on the ignorance.
Are Jews a new race?

Actually it's called logic. I've never heard anything other than the
Jews were fucked over in Europe. Because of that, out of a feeling of
guilt, the Europeans tried to fuck over the Arabs. Because the Arabs
tried to fight back (which any other group of people would have done
had the same thing happened to them) they've been demonized by certain
groups. I ask myself, if the Jews had been pt in Bolivia would the
Indians have acted any different than the Arabs? If they had been put
in Vietnam would the Vietnamese have acted any different than the
Arabs? If they had been put in Borneo would the natives of Borneo have
acted any different?

It seems to me the ignorant, racist bastard is you. I can't see how
any other group of people on this planet would have acted any
differently than the Arabs under the same circumstances. In fact,
logic dictates they act exactly as they did.

I don't have any skin in the game so your ignorance and racism isn't
going to cost me a thing. I suggest you look in the mirror and ask
yourself what it may cost you.


JH
Joe
2007-12-10 23:52:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
If what Joe says is true though it's almost statistically impossible
for every single outside group on the planet to decide to use the same
scapegoat unless some other forces are at work. What do YOU think are
those forces?
Jew hatred...plain and simple.

Everything stems from the old bullshit..."they killed our God"

they kidnapped christian kids
they poisoned the wells
they caused the plague
they control the wealth
they're all bankers
they stole our land...
etc etc etc
Derek Homsberg
2007-12-11 00:48:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
If what Joe says is true though it's almost statistically impossible
for every single outside group on the planet to decide to use the same
scapegoat unless some other forces are at work. What do YOU think are
those forces?
Jew hatred...plain and simple.
Everything stems from the old bullshit..."they killed our God"
they kidnapped christian kids
they poisoned the wells
they caused the plague
they control the wealth
they're all bankers
they stole our land...
etc etc etc
In order to understand the enitre phenomenon, of which Israel is only a
part, one should learn some Jewish history. Jews originally lived where
Israel now is. Then they were exiled to Egypt, where they were enslaved.
At some point they returned to Judea, and later were expelled by the
Babylonians and dispersed all over Europe. As a minority in Europe, they
were persecuted in many places until it was clear that they needed a country
of their own. Thus, Zionism (return of the Jews to Judea and Sumaria) was
born in the late 19th Century. The movement really became necessary after
Hitler's holocaust, when the State of Israel was officially created by the
UN. The so-called "persecution" of the Palestinian people is largely the
result of the Arabs' unwillingness to accept the state of Israel and / or to
absorb Palestinian people as Israel has absorbed many Jews from Arab
countries.
gumboman
2007-12-11 03:34:58 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:48:27 -0800, "Derek Homsberg"
Post by Derek Homsberg
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
If what Joe says is true though it's almost statistically impossible
for every single outside group on the planet to decide to use the same
scapegoat unless some other forces are at work. What do YOU think are
those forces?
Jew hatred...plain and simple.
Everything stems from the old bullshit..."they killed our God"
they kidnapped christian kids
they poisoned the wells
they caused the plague
they control the wealth
they're all bankers
they stole our land...
etc etc etc
In order to understand the enitre phenomenon, of which Israel is only a
part, one should learn some Jewish history. Jews originally lived where
Israel now is. Then they were exiled to Egypt, where they were enslaved.
At some point they returned to Judea, and later were expelled by the
Babylonians and dispersed all over Europe. As a minority in Europe, they
were persecuted in many places until it was clear that they needed a country
of their own. Thus, Zionism (return of the Jews to Judea and Sumaria) was
born in the late 19th Century. The movement really became necessary after
Hitler's holocaust, when the State of Israel was officially created by the
UN. The so-called "persecution" of the Palestinian people is largely the
result of the Arabs' unwillingness to accept the state of Israel and / or to
absorb Palestinian people as Israel has absorbed many Jews from Arab
countries.
LMAO _ I know you're serious and all this history is well known but do
you really expect a group, any group, to simply roll over and play
nice when foreigners give their land to someone else that has been
mostly gone for a couple thousand years? Can you name me a single
indigenous group on the planet that would accept that happening to
them? If not, why would you expect it of Arabs?

And you describe it as a 'so called persecution'. What would a real
persecution look like?

Let's say the Arabs never accept this intrusion on their land by the
UN. What happens? Same question I asked Joe - what's your endgame?
Does the US just kill everyone?



JH
Joe
2007-12-11 12:44:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Let's say the Arabs never accept this intrusion on their land by the
UN. What happens? Same question I asked Joe - what's your endgame?
Does the US just kill everyone?
We're seeing the endgame. Israel exists. End of story. The Arab states
don't have the ability to change that. They'll eventually accept that
and maybe we'll see a Palestine.
gumboman
2007-12-12 03:17:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
Let's say the Arabs never accept this intrusion on their land by the
UN. What happens? Same question I asked Joe - what's your endgame?
Does the US just kill everyone?
We're seeing the endgame. Israel exists. End of story. The Arab states
don't have the ability to change that. They'll eventually accept that
and maybe we'll see a Palestine.
LMAO - If I were a placing abet on the outcome I would bet just the
opposite. I think Iraq and Lebanon showed they not only can, but will,
change 'that'. Now that they know how to fight a conventional military
they'll never accept an Israeli state based on religion. Arafat will
be vindicated - the Israelis should have made a deal when they had the
chance.

So, what kind of odds will you give me? We'll put the bet in an
envelope and leave it for our descendants a hundred years from now to
see who wins the bet.


JH
D***@aol.com
2007-12-12 03:49:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
Let's say the Arabs never accept this intrusion on their land by the
UN. What happens? Same question I asked Joe - what's your endgame?
Does the US just kill everyone?
We're seeing the endgame. Israel exists. End of story. The Arab states
don't have the ability to change that. They'll eventually accept that
and maybe we'll see a Palestine.
LMAO - If I were a placing abet on the outcome I would bet just the
opposite. I think Iraq and Lebanon showed they not only can, but will,
change 'that'. Now that they know how to fight a conventional military
they'll never accept an Israeli state based on religion. Arafat will
be vindicated - the Israelis should have made a deal when they had the
chance.
So, what kind of odds will you give me? We'll put the bet in an
envelope and leave it for our descendants a hundred years from now to
see who wins the bet.
JH
First of all, the Jewish people were given back the land that was
theirs to begin with many many years ago. They were given a dried up
old piece of land that no one really wanted and they turned it into a
prosperous country. Then the Palastinians wanted it badly. Israel has
taken land in wars, yes. Israel defended itself during the 6 day war
and that is when they took they were attacked they took the Gaza
Strip, Golan Heights and the West Bank. Spoils of war. You can't
just set up to destroy a country and then cry about it when you lose
something. Why is it that no Arab country wants to take in the
"Palestinians," many of whom migrated into the West Bank from several
Arab nations AFTER Israel became a state? They migrated in from Iraq,
Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. If your argument is that Israel didn't
have that land for a long long time...well what about those migrants
who came into the West Bank? Many of those people had never lived
there EVER. And NOW they want land from Israel. They want part of
Jerusalem so they can destroy historical sites that are holy to more
than a few religions. No thanks.

If you are comfortable using Israel as the root of all evils because
it is what you are used to or because you find it easy. For you to
seem pleased or supportive of Iraq or Lebanon or any other Arab
country wiping out Israel is really scary. That's what we need right
now in this world....more Arab nations in power that hate our guts.
To me, people like you are scarier than anyone else. You have the
ability to educate yourself. You have the ability to really
investigate things and see what truly goes on...yet you choose to just
spew out hatred that is unfounded.

Gumboman, as you stated: "do
you really expect a group, any group, to simply roll over and play
nice when foreigners give their land to someone else that has been
mostly gone for a couple thousand years? Can you name me a single
indigenous group on the planet that would accept that happening to
them? If not, why would you expect it of Arabs? "

Most of those Arabs did NOT live in the West Bank or many of the
"Palestinians" lived elsewhere in other countries, never having lived
in what they now consider "Palestine." So do YOU really expect any
group to simply roll over and play nice when FOREIGNERS try to invade
their land?? Under the premise of your own argument...Israel should
not just roll over and give up land to people who really are
foreigners to that area.

If you are going to apply your theory to one group....I suppose you
should apply it to all...or it just MIGHT seem like you are somewhat
prejudice..and I am sure that you arent....right?

Peace,

Debbie
gumboman
2007-12-12 15:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
First of all, the Jewish people were given back the land that was
theirs to begin with many many years ago. They were given a dried up
old piece of land that no one really wanted and they turned it into a
prosperous country. Then the Palastinians wanted it badly. Israel has
taken land in wars, yes. Israel defended itself during the 6 day war
and that is when they took they were attacked they took the Gaza
Strip, Golan Heights and the West Bank. Spoils of war. You can't
just set up to destroy a country and then cry about it when you lose
something. Why is it that no Arab country wants to take in the
"Palestinians," many of whom migrated into the West Bank from several
Arab nations AFTER Israel became a state? They migrated in from Iraq,
Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. If your argument is that Israel didn't
have that land for a long long time...well what about those migrants
who came into the West Bank? Many of those people had never lived
there EVER. And NOW they want land from Israel. They want part of
Jerusalem so they can destroy historical sites that are holy to more
than a few religions. No thanks.
Missy, that's a nice speech. Not entirely factual but I'm sure it
would play well at a pep rally in Tel Aviv.
Post by D***@aol.com
If you are comfortable using Israel as the root of all evils because
it is what you are used to or because you find it easy. For you to
seem pleased or supportive of Iraq or Lebanon or any other Arab
country wiping out Israel is really scary. That's what we need right
now in this world....more Arab nations in power that hate our guts.
To me, people like you are scarier than anyone else. You have the
ability to educate yourself. You have the ability to really
investigate things and see what truly goes on...yet you choose to just
spew out hatred that is unfounded.
Well, Missy, I have investigated things for myself and what I have
found is you are mostly full of shit.

1. I don't give a shit about Israel one way or the other. I give a
shit about the US and I don't think the US should be involved in the
Middle East.

2. Arab nations hate 'us' because we have created an asymmetry of
power in the region to their detriment. I think it is entirely logical
for them to 'hate' us if they do so.

3. I'm not 'pleased' or 'supportive' of anything. I'm commenting on
what I see and it's not just me that sees the same things. The
Israelis, as a client state of the US, built their military to defeat
a group of countries who would fight another 67 or 73 war. Just as the
US built its military to fight a land based, mechanized, Soviet type
threat. The question is whether or not a guerilla type force can
defeat a mechanized force and I thank we see numerous cases of that
happening as the European colonial system devolved. Iraq and Lebanon
being the two latest examples.

If you look at a map you see an Israeli state that has antagonized
most of its neighbors. Neighbors who, because of the spread of science
and technology around the planet, have more than adequate rocketry to
rock Israel's world and Israel really has no defense. The lack of
defense isn't necessarily Israel's fault as there just isn't much of a
defense possible against small rocket attack. IF they can be faulted
for anything it would be an over reliance on mechanization as a
deterrent. The US can get away with that in IRaq because we just bring
the troops home and the Iraqis have no capability to follow. The
Israelis aren't in that position.

Contrary to what you may think not every criticism is a function of
hate. Plenty of people have criticized me over my lifetime not because
they hated me, but to make a particular point or nudge my thinking in
a different direction.

4. If Israel gets 'wiped out' (your words) it will be because of their
own stupidity and nothing else. Persoanlly, as I have stated before I
don't think that is a likely scenario. I think it is much more likely
that as the Arabs apply more pressure there begins to be an 'atrophy'
more than a 'wipe out'. If you take an honest look at the area I think
you would be able to see why outsiders would say that. Israel is
basically surrounded and there is nothing the US can do to change the
geography. ROckets and other small explosives are pouring into the
area and in the next big fight there aren't going to be tanks coming
across Israel's border there are going to be rockets that arrive in a
few minutes. Lots of rockets. The Israelis should have seen it coming
and prepared themselves accordingly - by getting a peace treaty. The
fact they wanted their 'spoils of war' (again, your words) kept them
from doing that and now they're kind of fucked (if you ask me as an
outsider).

5. If you classify trying to look at a particular situation
analytically as opposed to emotionally as 'hate' then you're as
foolish as the Israelis who thought that the land was 'theirs' (your
words) after being gone for a couple thousand years or that no group
would attempt to reclaim the 'spoils of war' (again, your words).
Post by D***@aol.com
Gumboman, as you stated: "do
you really expect a group, any group, to simply roll over and play
nice when foreigners give their land to someone else that has been
mostly gone for a couple thousand years? Can you name me a single
indigenous group on the planet that would accept that happening to
them? If not, why would you expect it of Arabs? "
Most of those Arabs did NOT live in the West Bank or many of the
"Palestinians" lived elsewhere in other countries, never having lived
in what they now consider "Palestine." So do YOU really expect any
group to simply roll over and play nice when FOREIGNERS try to invade
their land?? Under the premise of your own argument...Israel should
not just roll over and give up land to people who really are
foreigners to that area.
If you are going to apply your theory to one group....I suppose you
should apply it to all...or it just MIGHT seem like you are somewhat
prejudice..and I am sure that you arent....right?
If believing the US should remove itself from the Middle East makes me
prejudiced in your eyes then I'm just going to have to live with that.
I've always said though that any individual should have the freedom to
lend a hand in any way they see fit outside of US, state sponsored
violence. So I fully support your right to go over there and help out.
It seems to me after investigation that there appear to be as many
Israeli chickenhawks as there are Iraqi/neocon chickenhawks. People
who supposedly support a particular activity that would rather have
others put their asses on the line instead of them doing so
themselves. I suggest if it bothers you all that much as to what may
happen over there in the future, you stop worrying about me and
increasing numbers of people like me who think the US should leave the
Middle East for its own good, and get your ass over there to help out.



JH
D***@aol.com
2007-12-12 23:44:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by D***@aol.com
First of all, the Jewish people were given back the land that was
theirs to begin with many many years ago. �They were given a dried up
old piece of land that no one really wanted and they turned it into a
prosperous country. Then the Palastinians wanted it badly. �Israel has
taken land in wars, yes. Israel defended itself during the 6 day war
and that is when they took they were attacked they took the Gaza
Strip, Golan Heights and the West Bank. �Spoils of war. �You can't
just set up to destroy a country and then cry about it when you lose
something. �Why is it that no Arab country wants to take in the
"Palestinians," many of whom migrated into the West Bank from several
Arab nations AFTER Israel became a state? �They migrated in from Iraq,
Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. �If your argument is that Israel didn't
have that land for a long long time...well what about those migrants
who came into the West Bank? �Many of those people had never lived
there EVER. �And NOW they want land from Israel. �They want part of
Jerusalem so they can destroy historical sites that are holy to more
than a few religions. �No thanks.
Missy, that's a nice speech. Not entirely factual but I'm sure it
would play well at a pep rally in Tel Aviv.
Post by D***@aol.com
If you are comfortable using Israel as the root of all evils because
it is what you are used to or because you find it easy. �For you to
seem pleased or supportive of Iraq or Lebanon or any other Arab
country wiping out Israel is really scary. �That's what we need right
now in this world....more Arab nations in power that hate our guts.
To me, people like you are scarier than anyone else. �You have the
ability to educate yourself. �You have the ability to really
investigate things and see what truly goes on...yet you choose to just
spew out hatred that is unfounded.
Well, Missy, I have investigated things for myself and what I have
found is you are mostly full of shit.
1. I don't give a shit about Israel one way or the other. I give a
shit about the US and I don't think the US should be involved in the
Middle East.
2. Arab nations hate 'us' because we have created an asymmetry of
power in the region to their detriment. I think it is entirely logical
for them to 'hate' us if they do so.
3. I'm not 'pleased' or 'supportive' of anything. I'm commenting on
what I see and it's not just me that sees the same things. The
Israelis, as a client state of the US, built their military to defeat
a group of countries who would fight another 67 or 73 war. Just as the
US built its military to fight a land based, mechanized, Soviet type
threat. The question is whether or not a guerilla type force can
defeat a mechanized force and I thank we see numerous cases of that
happening as the European colonial system devolved. Iraq and Lebanon
being the two latest examples.
If you look at a map you see an Israeli state that has antagonized
most of its neighbors. Neighbors who, because of the spread of science
and technology around the planet, have more than adequate rocketry to
rock Israel's world and Israel really has no defense. The lack of
defense isn't necessarily Israel's fault as there just isn't much of a
defense possible against small rocket attack. IF they can be faulted
for anything it would be an over reliance on mechanization as a
deterrent. The US can get away with that in IRaq because we just bring
the troops home and the Iraqis have no capability to follow. The
Israelis aren't in that position.
Contrary to what you may think not every criticism is a function of
hate. Plenty of people have criticized me over my lifetime not because
they hated me, but to make a particular point or nudge my thinking in
a different direction.
4. If Israel gets 'wiped out' (your words) it will be because of their
own stupidity and nothing else. Persoanlly, as I have stated before I
don't think that is a likely scenario. I think it is much more likely
that as the Arabs apply more pressure there begins to be an 'atrophy'
more than a 'wipe out'. If you take an honest look at the area I think
you would be able to see why outsiders would say that. Israel is
basically surrounded and there is nothing the US can do to change the
geography. ROckets and other small explosives are pouring into the
area and in the next big fight there aren't going to be tanks coming
across Israel's border there are going to be rockets that arrive in a
few minutes. Lots of rockets. The Israelis should have seen it coming
and prepared themselves accordingly - by getting a peace treaty. The
fact they wanted their 'spoils of war' (again, your words) kept them
from doing that and now they're kind of fucked (if you ask me as an
outsider).
5. If you classify trying to look at a particular situation
analytically as opposed to emotionally as 'hate' then you're as
foolish as the Israelis who thought that the land was 'theirs' (your
words) after being gone for a couple thousand years or that no group
would attempt to reclaim the 'spoils of war' (again, your words).
Post by D***@aol.com
Gumboman, as you stated: �"do
you really expect a group, any group, to simply roll over and play
nice when foreigners give their land to someone else that has been
mostly gone for a couple thousand years? Can you name me a single
indigenous group on the planet that would accept that happening to
them? If not, why would you expect it of Arabs? "
Most of those Arabs did NOT live in the West Bank or many of the
"Palestinians" lived elsewhere in other countries, never having lived
in what they now consider "Palestine." �So do YOU really expect any
group to simply roll over and play nice when FOREIGNERS try to invade
their land?? �Under the premise of your own argument...Israel should
not just roll over and give up land to people who really are
foreigners to that area.
If you are going to apply your theory to one group....I suppose you
should apply it to all...or it just MIGHT seem like you are somewhat
prejudice..and I am sure that you arent....right?
If believing the US should remove itself from the Middle East makes me
prejudiced in your eyes then I'm just going to have to live with that.
I've always said though that any individual should have the freedom to
lend a hand in any way they see fit outside of US, state sponsored
violence. So I fully support your right to go over there and help out.
It seems to me after investigation that there appear to be as many
Israeli chickenhawks as there are Iraqi/neocon chickenhawks. People
who supposedly support a particular activity that would rather have
others put their asses on the line instead of them doing so
themselves. I suggest if it bothers you all that much as to what may
happen over there in the future, you stop worrying about me and
increasing numbers of people like me who think the US should leave the
Middle East for its own good, and get your ass over there to help out.
JH- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Well now your stupidity is REALLY showing....I put my name at the
bottom of my posts....not my initials....my name...and if you think
it's Missy you are an idiot...and if you are calling me MIssy as in
Little Missy..then you are just a pompous ass. I think either might
apply nicely to you. You obviously are so biased against Israel that
you can see nothing else. So there is absolutely no discussing any of
it with you. You feel that Israel is the one always harrassing
neighbors so obviously you have never read up on any conflicts or wars
that were begun by surrounding neighbors...or perhaps you choose to
ignore that information. Either way it is fine with me...and
umm...just so you know....the way you look at it is FAR from
analytical. Obviously it is a very emotional issue with you because
you are cursing and ranting and raving. I am sorry if it upsets you
so much that you become so irate and unstable. I will put you in my
prayers because you are obviously a lonely person looking for
reaction...your posts seem to change as you go along. No big deal to
me. I was posting my thoughts...analytically..and obviously you are
very upset that someone happens to disagree with you. Perhaps you
should be living in a country where people are not free to express
their thoughts??? Ummmm...perhaps an Islamic country?

Again peace....have a great day...and I won't be reading any of your
further thoughts on this....so enjoy the holidays and the walls of
your narrow mind..

Debbie or Missy...whichever you prefer
gumboman
2007-12-13 04:26:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
Well now your stupidity is REALLY showing....I put my name at the
bottom of my posts....not my initials....my name...and if you think
it's Missy you are an idiot...and if you are calling me MIssy as in
Little Missy..then you are just a pompous ass. I think either might
apply nicely to you. You obviously are so biased against Israel that
you can see nothing else. So there is absolutely no discussing any of
it with you. You feel that Israel is the one always harrassing
neighbors so obviously you have never read up on any conflicts or wars
that were begun by surrounding neighbors...or perhaps you choose to
ignore that information. Either way it is fine with me...and
umm...just so you know....the way you look at it is FAR from
analytical. Obviously it is a very emotional issue with you because
you are cursing and ranting and raving. I am sorry if it upsets you
so much that you become so irate and unstable. I will put you in my
prayers because you are obviously a lonely person looking for
reaction...your posts seem to change as you go along. No big deal to
me. I was posting my thoughts...analytically..and obviously you are
very upset that someone happens to disagree with you. Perhaps you
should be living in a country where people are not free to express
their thoughts??? Ummmm...perhaps an Islamic country?
Again peace....have a great day...and I won't be reading any of your
further thoughts on this....so enjoy the holidays and the walls of
your narrow mind..
Debbie or Missy...whichever you prefer
Or maybe Patrick?


JH
Michael
2007-12-21 17:23:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by D***@aol.com
First of all, the Jewish people were given back the land that was
theirs to begin with many many years ago. They were given a dried up
old piece of land that no one really wanted and they turned it into a
prosperous country. Then the Palastinians wanted it badly. Israel has
taken land in wars, yes. Israel defended itself during the 6 day war
and that is when they took they were attacked they took the Gaza
Strip, Golan Heights and the West Bank. Spoils of war. You can't
just set up to destroy a country and then cry about it when you lose
something. Why is it that no Arab country wants to take in the
"Palestinians," many of whom migrated into the West Bank from several
Arab nations AFTER Israel became a state? They migrated in from Iraq,
Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. If your argument is that Israel didn't
have that land for a long long time...well what about those migrants
who came into the West Bank? Many of those people had never lived
there EVER. And NOW they want land from Israel. They want part of
Jerusalem so they can destroy historical sites that are holy to more
than a few religions. No thanks.
Missy, that's a nice speech. Not entirely factual but I'm sure it
would play well at a pep rally in Tel Aviv.
Post by D***@aol.com
If you are comfortable using Israel as the root of all evils because
it is what you are used to or because you find it easy. For you to
seem pleased or supportive of Iraq or Lebanon or any other Arab
country wiping out Israel is really scary. That's what we need right
now in this world....more Arab nations in power that hate our guts.
To me, people like you are scarier than anyone else. You have the
ability to educate yourself. You have the ability to really
investigate things and see what truly goes on...yet you choose to just
spew out hatred that is unfounded.
Well, Missy, I have investigated things for myself and what I have
found is you are mostly full of shit.
1. I don't give a shit about Israel one way or the other. I give a
shit about the US and I don't think the US should be involved in the
Middle East.
2. Arab nations hate 'us' because we have created an asymmetry of
power in the region to their detriment. I think it is entirely logical
for them to 'hate' us if they do so.
3. I'm not 'pleased' or 'supportive' of anything. I'm commenting on
what I see and it's not just me that sees the same things. The
Israelis, as a client state of the US, built their military to defeat
a group of countries who would fight another 67 or 73 war. Just as the
US built its military to fight a land based, mechanized, Soviet type
threat. The question is whether or not a guerilla type force can
defeat a mechanized force and I thank we see numerous cases of that
happening as the European colonial system devolved. Iraq and Lebanon
being the two latest examples.
If you look at a map you see an Israeli state that has antagonized
most of its neighbors. Neighbors who, because of the spread of science
and technology around the planet, have more than adequate rocketry to
rock Israel's world and Israel really has no defense. The lack of
defense isn't necessarily Israel's fault as there just isn't much of a
defense possible against small rocket attack. IF they can be faulted
for anything it would be an over reliance on mechanization as a
deterrent. The US can get away with that in IRaq because we just bring
the troops home and the Iraqis have no capability to follow. The
Israelis aren't in that position.
Contrary to what you may think not every criticism is a function of
hate. Plenty of people have criticized me over my lifetime not because
they hated me, but to make a particular point or nudge my thinking in
a different direction.
4. If Israel gets 'wiped out' (your words) it will be because of their
own stupidity and nothing else. Persoanlly, as I have stated before I
don't think that is a likely scenario. I think it is much more likely
that as the Arabs apply more pressure there begins to be an 'atrophy'
more than a 'wipe out'. If you take an honest look at the area I think
you would be able to see why outsiders would say that. Israel is
basically surrounded and there is nothing the US can do to change the
geography. ROckets and other small explosives are pouring into the
area and in the next big fight there aren't going to be tanks coming
across Israel's border there are going to be rockets that arrive in a
few minutes. Lots of rockets. The Israelis should have seen it coming
and prepared themselves accordingly - by getting a peace treaty. The
fact they wanted their 'spoils of war' (again, your words) kept them
from doing that and now they're kind of fucked (if you ask me as an
outsider).
5. If you classify trying to look at a particular situation
analytically as opposed to emotionally as 'hate' then you're as
foolish as the Israelis who thought that the land was 'theirs' (your
words) after being gone for a couple thousand years or that no group
would attempt to reclaim the 'spoils of war' (again, your words).
Post by D***@aol.com
Gumboman, as you stated: "do
you really expect a group, any group, to simply roll over and play
nice when foreigners give their land to someone else that has been
mostly gone for a couple thousand years? Can you name me a single
indigenous group on the planet that would accept that happening to
them? If not, why would you expect it of Arabs? "
Most of those Arabs did NOT live in the West Bank or many of the
"Palestinians" lived elsewhere in other countries, never having lived
in what they now consider "Palestine." So do YOU really expect any
group to simply roll over and play nice when FOREIGNERS try to invade
their land?? Under the premise of your own argument...Israel should
not just roll over and give up land to people who really are
foreigners to that area.
If you are going to apply your theory to one group....I suppose you
should apply it to all...or it just MIGHT seem like you are somewhat
prejudice..and I am sure that you arent....right?
If believing the US should remove itself from the Middle East makes me
prejudiced in your eyes then I'm just going to have to live with that.
I've always said though that any individual should have the freedom to
lend a hand in any way they see fit outside of US, state sponsored
violence. So I fully support your right to go over there and help out.
It seems to me after investigation that there appear to be as many
Israeli chickenhawks as there are Iraqi/neocon chickenhawks. People
who supposedly support a particular activity that would rather have
others put their asses on the line instead of them doing so
themselves. I suggest if it bothers you all that much as to what may
happen over there in the future, you stop worrying about me and
increasing numbers of people like me who think the US should leave the
Middle East for its own good, and get your ass over there to help out.
JH
I think gumboman would feel much more at home here:

www.stormfront.org
A to Z
2007-12-21 20:58:18 UTC
Permalink
good thing this got such a quick retort - wouldn't want to let a friendly
thread die....
gumboman
2007-12-22 18:05:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.

It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.


JH
Michael
2007-12-23 04:47:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
gumboman
2007-12-23 05:06:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.

Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.

Merry Christmas asshole.


JH
m***@gmail.com
2007-12-23 05:08:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Slow down, hoss. Did you just defend stormfront??
gumboman
2007-12-23 05:23:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Slow down, hoss. Did you just defend stormfront??
Hoss, I didn't defend anyone or anything except myself. I didn't
notice you coming to my defense when he posted his shit which he has
done more than a few times now. Why don't you butt the fuck out of it
and I'll take care of him myself.


JH
m***@gmail.com
2007-12-23 05:38:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Slow down, hoss.  Did you just defend stormfront??
Hoss, I didn't defend anyone or anything except myself.
Better re-read that last sentence in the previous post, then.
Post by gumboman
I didn't notice you coming to my defense when he posted his shit...
Oh, grow the fuck up. What is this, "he made me do it"? Or, wait,
wait, "he did it first"?

I didn't need to respond, the taunt was self-evidently stupid. As I'm
sure anyone who bothered to read noticed it. Adam had it nailed,
there was no need for anything further.

There's no requirement for you to engage in blanket coverage every
time the topic comes up, you know.
Post by gumboman
... which he has
done more than a few times now. Why don't you butt the fuck out of it
and I'll take care of him myself.
This is a public forum. You want to take care of him in private, go
'head. Go out in public doing moral relativism shit on stormfront,
then you have explaining to do. In the public forum, I'll come and go
as I please. As always.
gumboman
2007-12-23 06:45:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by gumboman
Hoss, I didn't defend anyone or anything except myself.
Better re-read that last sentence in the previous post, then.
THere is nothing to re-read. I didn't defend anything and frankly,
other than a quick look, I have no idea what stormfront is or what it
is about.

Are they someone else who wants my money?
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by gumboman
I didn't notice you coming to my defense when he posted his shit...
Oh, grow the fuck up. What is this, "he made me do it"? Or, wait,
wait, "he did it first"?
You grow the fuck up. If you don't like it then don't butt in. Who
made you the person that me or anyone else has to answer to?
Post by m***@gmail.com
I didn't need to respond, the taunt was self-evidently stupid. As I'm
sure anyone who bothered to read noticed it. Adam had it nailed,
there was no need for anything further.
I have no idea what Adam had nailed or what you are talking about. I
rarely read anything Adam writes.

As far as I can tell this is between me and the chickenhawk moocher
and you should mind your own fucking business.
Post by m***@gmail.com
There's no requirement for you to engage in blanket coverage every
time the topic comes up, you know.
You're setting the rules for all of us now?

In this case I haven't read what was going on for a couple weeks but I
was called out specifically and I responded to that person. I really
don't see where any of it is any of your business.
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by gumboman
... which he has
done more than a few times now. Why don't you butt the fuck out of it
and I'll take care of him myself.
This is a public forum. You want to take care of him in private, go
'head. Go out in public doing moral relativism shit on stormfront,
then you have explaining to do. In the public forum, I'll come and go
as I please. As always.
As will I. Are the rules different for you and everyone else? I didn't
say anything about what I would or wouldn't do to anyone in public or
private so get off your high horse and stop making shit up. You can
take your moral relativism, stormfront and everything else and shove
it up your ass if you want to take up for that mooching chickenhawk
prick.



JH
m***@gmail.com
2007-12-23 08:52:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by gumboman
Hoss, I didn't defend anyone or anything except myself.
Better re-read that last sentence in the previous post, then.
THere is nothing to re-read. I didn't defend anything and frankly,
other than a quick look, I have no idea what stormfront is or what it
is about.
Obviously.
gumboman
2007-12-23 21:41:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by gumboman
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by gumboman
Hoss, I didn't defend anyone or anything except myself.
Better re-read that last sentence in the previous post, then.
THere is nothing to re-read. I didn't defend anything and frankly,
other than a quick look, I have no idea what stormfront is or what it
is about.
Obviously.
Lots of things are obvious. Some of us are just too blind to see.



JH
Dan
2007-12-23 06:31:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Well now
Santa came down chimney, half past three
With lots of nice little presents for that asshole and me
Merry Christmas asshole, you surely treat me nice
And I feel like I'm living, just living in paradise

And I just came down to say ... Merry Christmas asshole
I just wanna say ... Merry Christmas asshole
I just wanna say ... Merry Christmas asshole
I just wanna say ... Merry Christmas asshole
And happy new year too
--
Dan
Michael
2008-01-02 19:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?

I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.

As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country
on their own. Let me know when you see any US military patrolling the
streets of Tel Aviv. Every male and female Israeli citizen does
mandatory time in the military at age 18...I'd say that probably goes
beyond your armchair "service" to your own country.
Evolution
2008-01-03 01:31:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country on
their own.
Are you suggesting we aren't giving them billions of dollars?

Laurie
mikegold
2008-01-03 03:37:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Chickenhawk Moochers?  Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes.  I'm not mooching off
of anyone.  Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country on
their own.
Are you suggesting we aren't giving them billions of dollars?
Laurie- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Did you read anywhere in that post where I suggested such a thing?

However, Israeli military personnel aren't looking for American
soldiers to handle their battles.
Willy Eyenine
2008-01-03 03:41:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country on
their own.
Are you suggesting we aren't giving them billions of dollars?
Laurie- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
"Did you read anywhere in that post where I suggested such a thing?

However, Israeli military personnel aren't looking for American
soldiers to handle their battles."

From what I've heard of the Israeli Military, I get the feeling American
troops
would get in the way. They know how to get a job done, I guess.
gumboman
2008-01-03 05:16:54 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 19:41:22 -0800, "Willy Eyenine"
Post by Willy Eyenine
From what I've heard of the Israeli Military, I get the feeling American
troops
would get in the way. They know how to get a job done, I guess.
Shit Billyi. even with all the money and weapons we give them they've
been kicked out of Lebanon twice, not to mention with their brutality
in Gaza those poor folks are still hanging on and firing rockets they
make in their garages. The last round was embarrassing given their air
superiority (the other side didn't even have an air force).


Head to Vegas and take the points and Hezbollah in the next round.



JH
Evolution
2008-01-03 07:26:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by mikegold
Post by Evolution
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country on
their own.
Are you suggesting we aren't giving them billions of dollars?
Laurie- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Did you read anywhere in that post where I suggested such a thing?
Well, you responded to gumboman complaining about being asked to pay for
Israel's warmongering and persecution of the palestinians by saying they
are doing just fine defending their country on their own. They aren't.
We are helping to fund it. That's the problem. If they want to steal
land, persecute and antagonize their neighbors, all power to them, but
they shouldn't expect the US to fund their behavior. The consequences
are proving deadly to us. Protect them from attacks, yes. Fund their
aggression and land-grabbing, no.

Laurie
Michael
2008-01-03 13:32:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by mikegold
Post by Evolution
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country on
their own.
Are you suggesting we aren't giving them billions of dollars?
Laurie- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Did you read anywhere in that post where I suggested such a thing?
Well, you responded to gumboman complaining about being asked to pay
for Israel's warmongering and persecution of the palestinians by saying
they are doing just fine defending their country on their own. They
aren't. We are helping to fund it. That's the problem. If they want
to steal land, persecute and antagonize their neighbors, all power to
them, but they shouldn't expect the US to fund their behavior. The
consequences are proving deadly to us. Protect them from attacks, yes.
Fund their aggression and land-grabbing, no.
Laurie
Shh....go back into the other room...the grown-ups are talking.
Evolution
2008-01-03 16:57:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Post by Evolution
Post by mikegold
Post by Evolution
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
www.stormfront.org
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you sorry bastard. Just leave
the horse alone - we know you lobbied to have someone else pay for it
and provide it to you.
It's people like you that are the reason I think the US needs to
disassociate itself from the Middle East. If you're so worried about
things over there get over there and do something about it yourself as
opposed to lobbying for other people to do it for you.
JH
Hits a little too close to home, huh?
Not at all. I've never liked chickenhawk moochers. I didn't see any at
your link. At least those people weren't asking me to do something for
them that they weren't willing to do themselves and they certainly
weren't expecting me to pay for any of their activities.
Wish I could say the same about the Israelis and their US chickenhawk
compatriots.
Merry Christmas asshole.
JH
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country on
their own.
Are you suggesting we aren't giving them billions of dollars?
Laurie- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Did you read anywhere in that post where I suggested such a thing?
Well, you responded to gumboman complaining about being asked to pay
for Israel's warmongering and persecution of the palestinians by
saying they are doing just fine defending their country on their own.
They aren't. We are helping to fund it. That's the problem. If
they want to steal land, persecute and antagonize their neighbors, all
power to them, but they shouldn't expect the US to fund their
behavior. The consequences are proving deadly to us. Protect them
from attacks, yes. Fund their aggression and land-grabbing, no.
Laurie
Shh....go back into the other room...the grown-ups are talking.
So... in other words, you have no rational response... very Patrick-like...

Laurie
gumboman
2008-01-03 05:21:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country
on their own. Let me know when you see any US military patrolling the
streets of Tel Aviv. Every male and female Israeli citizen does
mandatory time in the military at age 18...I'd say that probably goes
beyond your armchair "service" to your own country.
First of all I did do military service so I've earned the right to say
anything I fucking well please.

Second, if they aren't mooching then I assume you agree the US should
stop interfering on either side in the Middle East. No more money and
free weapons for Israel and the next time an Israelil
politician/general says the US should bomb/invade Iran because the
Israelis want us to do it then the president of the US should tell
that person(s) to go fuck themselves and do it themselves.

What a fucking idiot.


JH
Michael
2008-01-03 13:30:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Chickenhawk Moochers? Something else you've made up?
I don't know about you but I pay plenty of taxes. I'm not mooching off
of anyone. Perhaps that's what you do down in Texas.
As for the Israelis, they are doing just fine defending their country
on their own. Let me know when you see any US military patrolling the
streets of Tel Aviv. Every male and female Israeli citizen does
mandatory time in the military at age 18...I'd say that probably goes
beyond your armchair "service" to your own country.
First of all I did do military service so I've earned the right to say
anything I fucking well please.
Second, if they aren't mooching then I assume you agree the US should
stop interfering on either side in the Middle East. No more money and
free weapons for Israel and the next time an Israelil
politician/general says the US should bomb/invade Iran because the
Israelis want us to do it then the president of the US should tell
that person(s) to go fuck themselves and do it themselves.
What a fucking idiot.
JH
Go ahead and keep saying whatever you want. It's always good for a laugh.

You reveal your complete ignorance of the subject and history of the
region, as well as your bigotry every time you choose to respond.
gumboman
2008-01-03 14:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
First of all I did do military service so I've earned the right to say
anything I fucking well please.
Second, if they aren't mooching then I assume you agree the US should
stop interfering on either side in the Middle East. No more money and
free weapons for Israel and the next time an Israelil
politician/general says the US should bomb/invade Iran because the
Israelis want us to do it then the president of the US should tell
that person(s) to go fuck themselves and do it themselves.
What a fucking idiot.
JH
Go ahead and keep saying whatever you want. It's always good for a laugh.
You reveal your complete ignorance of the subject and history of the
region, as well as your bigotry every time you choose to respond.
Paraphrasing Mr. Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute - when you can't argue
the facts resort to ad hominem attacks.

At this point I can't say I'm surprised and have actually become
immune to it.

On the one hand you say the Israelis need no help from us then when
asked if you agree with the notion that aid should be cut and the
president of the US should rule out any future interference based on
statements from Israelis themselves calling for US military fighting
on their side you have no answer other than the attacks. Yet, you want
to talk to Laurie about 'grown ups'.

Like I said, what a fucking idiot.

Look, it's really very simple. One way or the other the US is going to
be forced to leave the Middle East just like every other invading
empire over the centuries. We should do that before we continue to
pile up debt that we can't pay for a lost cause. The Israelis will
have to learn to take care of themselves or, as NG says, move to
Orange County. To paraphrase another, it's nothing personal, just
business.



JH
Michael
2008-01-03 16:54:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
On the one hand you say the Israelis need no help from us then when
asked if you agree with the notion that aid should be cut
The Israelis have already proposed that there be a reduction in aid.
Post by gumboman
and the
president of the US should rule out any future interference based on
statements from Israelis themselves calling for US military fighting
on their side
No Israelis have suggested that the US military defend Israel or fight
along side Israeli soldiers. Several Generals and members of the
Knesset may have given their opinions that the US should attack Iran
but it takes a huge leap of logic to interpret that as a call from the
Israeli government for a US strike on Iran.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jX-sUcs6ejpG7KHkFF4JoHMBiqRw

http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/The+Iranian+Threat/Statements+by+Israeli+leaders/Iran-+Statements+by+Israeli+leaders+-+June+2007.htm?DisplayMode=print

US

Congressmen and military personnel spout off on issues all the time,
this doesn't make what they say "official" US policy.
Post by gumboman
Post by gumboman
you have no answer other than the attacks. Yet, you want
to talk to Laurie about 'grown ups'.
Like I said, what a fucking idiot.
Look, it's really very simple. One way or the other the US is going to
be forced to leave the Middle East just like every other invading
empire over the centuries. We should do that before we continue to
pile up debt that we can't pay for a lost cause. The Israelis will
have to learn to take care of themselves or, as NG says, move to
Orange County. To paraphrase another, it's nothing personal, just
business.
JH
gumboman
2008-01-03 19:18:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
On the one hand you say the Israelis need no help from us then when
asked if you agree with the notion that aid should be cut
The Israelis have already proposed that there be a reduction in aid.
Post by gumboman
and the
president of the US should rule out any future interference based on
statements from Israelis themselves calling for US military fighting
on their side
No Israelis have suggested that the US military defend Israel or fight
along side Israeli soldiers. Several Generals and members of the
Knesset may have given their opinions that the US should attack Iran
but it takes a huge leap of logic to interpret that as a call from the
Israeli government for a US strike on Iran.
OK, whatever you say. People can judge this paragraph for themselves.


JH
mikegold
2008-01-03 21:32:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Michael
Post by gumboman
On the one hand you say the Israelis need no help from us then when
asked if you agree with the notion that aid should be cut
The Israelis have already proposed that there be a reduction in aid.
Post by gumboman
and the
president of the US should rule out any future interference based on
statements from Israelis themselves calling for US military fighting
on their side
No Israelis have suggested that the US military defend Israel or fight
along side Israeli soldiers.  Several Generals and members of the
Knesset may have given their opinions that the US should attack Iran
but it takes a huge leap of logic to interpret that as a call from the
Israeli government for a US strike on Iran.
OK, whatever you say. People can judge this paragraph for themselves.
JH- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
As your lap dog Laurie would say, "cite."

Show me where the government of Israel has asked the United States to
attack Iran, not just the random Knesset member or general.

Shimon Peres, the President and member of the majority Kadima party,
just stated yesterday that he did not believe war with Iran would be
necessary
gumboman
2008-01-03 23:01:26 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:32:22 -0800 (PST), mikegold
Post by mikegold
As your lap dog Laurie would say, "cite."
Show me where the government of Israel has asked the United States to
attack Iran, not just the random Knesset member or general.
Shimon Peres, the President and member of the majority Kadima party,
just stated yesterday that he did not believe war with Iran would be
necessary
Hey Laurie - are you my lapdog?

Look, I'm a single solitary individual. Why does anything I think
bother you so much? Are you afraid that increasing numbers of people
are getting wise to the game? Based on the money raised by Mr. Paul
and the number of individual donations he has received that would seem
to be the case wouldn't it?

It's real simple. The US can't afford to keep doing this. It's going
to tear this country apart. Lots of folks across the planet are just
going to have to learn to deal with their problems themselves. TO
think that the US can perpetually guarantee a small Jewish presence in
that area was always an absurd idea. If they can get along without us
as you say then great, there should be no reason for you to disagree
with the idea that the US should stop engaging in foreign adventures.


JH
Evolution
2008-01-04 05:28:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:32:22 -0800 (PST), mikegold
Post by mikegold
As your lap dog Laurie would say, "cite."
Show me where the government of Israel has asked the United States to
attack Iran, not just the random Knesset member or general.
Shimon Peres, the President and member of the majority Kadima party,
just stated yesterday that he did not believe war with Iran would be
necessary
Hey Laurie - are you my lapdog?
As long as you don't bring up Hillary... ;)

Laurie
gumboman
2008-01-04 06:35:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:32:22 -0800 (PST), mikegold
Post by mikegold
As your lap dog Laurie would say, "cite."
Show me where the government of Israel has asked the United States to
attack Iran, not just the random Knesset member or general.
Shimon Peres, the President and member of the majority Kadima party,
just stated yesterday that he did not believe war with Iran would be
necessary
Hey Laurie - are you my lapdog?
As long as you don't bring up Hillary... ;)
Laurie
So, what does Hillary do after tonight?


JH
Zeke
2008-01-04 08:18:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
So, what does Hillary do after tonight?
After tonight my biggest hope is that Barack Obama learned something while
living in The Chi, and that rather than the "golden boy" that some think he
is, he turns out to be one tough fucking halfbreed. Because he's gonna need
to be. The machine is stirring...

=============================================
To them that threw you away you ain't nothing but gone.
Bruce Springsteen
gumboman
2008-01-04 16:14:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zeke
Post by gumboman
So, what does Hillary do after tonight?
After tonight my biggest hope is that Barack Obama learned something while
living in The Chi, and that rather than the "golden boy" that some think he
is, he turns out to be one tough fucking halfbreed. Because he's gonna need
to be. The machine is stirring...
I gotta tell you, the more I see of Obama the less I like him. I think
all this 'let's get along' talk is a death trap for the Democrats. The
D's need someone who is going to be plunging daggers into the
opposition and finishing them off, not trying to fix their wounds so
they live to fight another day.



JH
Evolution
2008-01-04 17:33:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Zeke
Post by gumboman
So, what does Hillary do after tonight?
After tonight my biggest hope is that Barack Obama learned something while
living in The Chi, and that rather than the "golden boy" that some think he
is, he turns out to be one tough fucking halfbreed. Because he's gonna need
to be. The machine is stirring...
I gotta tell you, the more I see of Obama the less I like him. I think
all this 'let's get along' talk is a death trap for the Democrats. The
D's need someone who is going to be plunging daggers into the
opposition and finishing them off, not trying to fix their wounds so
they live to fight another day.
JH
Yes, it's very naive to say you're going to get rid of partisanship.
He's too nice. I think he's very smart, but being charming and smart
has gotten him where he is without any battles. I honestly don't think
he would stand up well when the republicans start slinging shit.

Hillary has been there, done that, all her life as one of a handful of
female lawyers back in the day, after learning from her failed universal
health care, what she went through with her husband as president, etc.

Laurie
gumboman
2008-01-04 18:25:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
Post by Zeke
Post by gumboman
So, what does Hillary do after tonight?
After tonight my biggest hope is that Barack Obama learned something while
living in The Chi, and that rather than the "golden boy" that some think he
is, he turns out to be one tough fucking halfbreed. Because he's gonna need
to be. The machine is stirring...
I gotta tell you, the more I see of Obama the less I like him. I think
all this 'let's get along' talk is a death trap for the Democrats. The
D's need someone who is going to be plunging daggers into the
opposition and finishing them off, not trying to fix their wounds so
they live to fight another day.
JH
Yes, it's very naive to say you're going to get rid of partisanship.
He's too nice. I think he's very smart, but being charming and smart
has gotten him where he is without any battles. I honestly don't think
he would stand up well when the republicans start slinging shit.
No, Denise has been right about him all along. When he comes South
it's going to be the 'nigger coming to fuck your daughter' routine.
And it will be nasty. And there won't be crossovers to help him out.

I'm trying to figure out which state he wins that Kerry lost that
would have put him over the top.
Post by Evolution
Hillary has been there, done that, all her life as one of a handful of
female lawyers back in the day, after learning from her failed universal
health care, what she went through with her husband as president, etc.
Yes, but from a liberal point of view Edwards is much better overall.
He's not afraid to call bullshit on the conservatives. If Hillary
wants to get the nomination, or be elected, she isn't going to do it
with crossover type votes. She's going to need people like Denise and
my guess, at this point, is she has a whole lot of sucking up to do or
you all can kiss her ass goodbye (assuming that enough people don't
leave both the Obama and Hillary camps to give Edwards the nod which
is a distinct possibility).



JH



JH
Denise
2008-01-04 22:50:04 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 4, 1:25�pm, gumboman <***@gumbo.com> wrote:

. She's going to need people like Denise and my guess, at this point,
is she has a whole lot of sucking up to do or
you all can kiss her ass goodbye (assuming that enough people don't
leave both the Obama and Hillary camps to give Edwards the nod which
is a distinct possibility).
Denise works for the Edwards camp and so long as he is in this thing,
he's got my support. My efforts for Edwards go back at least 8 years
now. I've had personal dealings with his office here over a missing
child issue, and followed his moves quite closely.

If the choices are still open by the time the primary is here, in a
scenario where it is down to only Clinton or Obama, she gets my
support. I think she's much tougher and whether she's right or wrong,
she's still got much more experience. Plus she's got Bill.

Incidentally, someone mentioned them as a team, and I don't see a
snowball's chance in hell of that happening.

I know what John Edwards has been doing hands-on since the 2004
election and long before that, and it's been a lot more than sitting
the Illinois legislature or briefly in the U.S. Senate, basically
daydreaming of being president and mentally writing great
inspirational speeches.

But, as I said, if Obama is the nominee, then there's my vote. I'll
feel like he can't win, unless I see a lot more substance between now
and then, but I'll still cast my vote for the Dem.
gumboman
2008-01-05 00:19:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise
But, as I said, if Obama is the nominee, then there's my vote. I'll
feel like he can't win, unless I see a lot more substance between now
and then, but I'll still cast my vote for the Dem.
If this is the case the Democratic Party needs to have its head
examined. It's still an electoral college game and although I haven't
looked at a map lately I can't think of a single state off the top of
my head that he can pick up that Kerry lost in 2004. I'm not even sure
he can get Ohio - the Republicans may not have to steal it. I also
doubt that a black is going to play very well out West.

After last night the best choice would be Edwards. We'll see what
happens.



JH
Evolution
2008-01-05 00:47:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Denise
But, as I said, if Obama is the nominee, then there's my vote. I'll
feel like he can't win, unless I see a lot more substance between now
and then, but I'll still cast my vote for the Dem.
If this is the case the Democratic Party needs to have its head
examined. It's still an electoral college game and although I haven't
looked at a map lately I can't think of a single state off the top of
my head that he can pick up that Kerry lost in 2004. I'm not even sure
he can get Ohio - the Republicans may not have to steal it. I also
doubt that a black is going to play very well out West.
I think he'll do very well in Ohio. All he has to do is pick up the
votes the republicans steal...

As for the West, come on... California is the place where we vote for
actors; his act will go very well here. After all, we re-elected the
actor who conspired with Enron to get away with ripping us off of 9
billion with a fake energy shortage, who tried to steal funds from
education rather than raise taxes, and who spent millions on a special
election designed to give him more power, and got shot down. We're all
about smoke and mirrors...

Laurie
gumboman
2008-01-05 01:13:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
Post by Denise
But, as I said, if Obama is the nominee, then there's my vote. I'll
feel like he can't win, unless I see a lot more substance between now
and then, but I'll still cast my vote for the Dem.
If this is the case the Democratic Party needs to have its head
examined. It's still an electoral college game and although I haven't
looked at a map lately I can't think of a single state off the top of
my head that he can pick up that Kerry lost in 2004. I'm not even sure
he can get Ohio - the Republicans may not have to steal it. I also
doubt that a black is going to play very well out West.
I think he'll do very well in Ohio. All he has to do is pick up the
votes the republicans steal...
As for the West, come on... California is the place where we vote for
actors; his act will go very well here. After all, we re-elected the
actor who conspired with Enron to get away with ripping us off of 9
billion with a fake energy shortage, who tried to steal funds from
education rather than raise taxes, and who spent millions on a special
election designed to give him more power, and got shot down. We're all
about smoke and mirrors...
Laurie
I'm not talking about California.


JH

Evolution
2008-01-05 00:22:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise
. She's going to need people like Denise and my guess, at this point,
is she has a whole lot of sucking up to do or
you all can kiss her ass goodbye (assuming that enough people don't
leave both the Obama and Hillary camps to give Edwards the nod which
is a distinct possibility).
Denise works for the Edwards camp and so long as he is in this thing,
he's got my support. My efforts for Edwards go back at least 8 years
now. I've had personal dealings with his office here over a missing
child issue, and followed his moves quite closely.
If the choices are still open by the time the primary is here, in a
scenario where it is down to only Clinton or Obama, she gets my
support. I think she's much tougher and whether she's right or wrong,
she's still got much more experience. Plus she's got Bill.
Incidentally, someone mentioned them as a team, and I don't see a
snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
I know what John Edwards has been doing hands-on since the 2004
election and long before that, and it's been a lot more than sitting
the Illinois legislature or briefly in the U.S. Senate, basically
daydreaming of being president and mentally writing great
inspirational speeches.
But, as I said, if Obama is the nominee, then there's my vote. I'll
feel like he can't win, unless I see a lot more substance between now
and then, but I'll still cast my vote for the Dem.
I didn't know you were actually working for Edwards, Denise. Perhaps
you can answer my concerns about him, which is his history and what he
has done in his past on behalf of the poor, which he is championing now.
If I got a sense that this issue were not simply an election year
conversion, I might not feel he's such a phony... :)

I would vote for Elizabeth in a hot minute... :)

Laurie
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
2008-01-05 00:38:52 UTC
Permalink
Denise:
I want to ask a question. I hear a lot about Edwards votes in the
Senate, how he isn't much of a liberal and all of that. That he's
rather conservative. How much of that was due to representing NC in
the Senate? And how much of it is having big banks like Wachovia and
BoA? Even the most liberal Senator can't go around dissing two of the
state's biggest employers, right? Personally, I think you are seeing
the real Edwards. He's is free from the BS of the Senate, so he can
say what he really believes.


As far as Jack's comment about JFK, RFK and FDR. He's exactly right.
Why do people think a rich man can't care about the poor. Hell, Bruce
and Eddie Vedder are pretty damn rich now and they care about the
poor. No one hear would say either of them are phonies. So why is
Edwards?
Post by Denise
. She's going to need people like Denise and my guess, at this point,
is she has a whole lot of sucking up to do or
you all can kiss her ass goodbye (assuming that enough people don't
leave both the Obama and Hillary camps to give Edwards the nod which
is a distinct possibility).
Denise works for the Edwards camp and so long as he is in this thing,
he's got my support. My efforts for Edwards go back at least 8 years
now. I've had personal dealings with his office here over a missing
child issue, and followed his moves quite closely.
If the choices are still open by the time the primary is here, in a
scenario where it is down to only Clinton or Obama, she gets my
support. I think she's much tougher and whether she's right or wrong,
she's still got much more experience. Plus she's got Bill.
Incidentally, someone mentioned them as a team, and I don't see a
snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
I know what John Edwards has been doing hands-on since the 2004
election and long before that, and it's been a lot more than sitting
the Illinois legislature or briefly in the U.S. Senate, basically
daydreaming of being president and mentally writing great
inspirational speeches.
But, as I said, if Obama is the nominee, then there's my vote. I'll
feel like he can't win, unless I see a lot more substance between now
and then, but I'll still cast my vote for the Dem.
gumboman
2008-01-05 01:13:22 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 16:38:52 -0800 (PST), Calvin Jones and the 13th
Post by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
As far as Jack's comment about JFK, RFK and FDR. He's exactly right.
Why do people think a rich man can't care about the poor. Hell, Bruce
and Eddie Vedder are pretty damn rich now and they care about the
poor. No one hear would say either of them are phonies. So why is
Edwards?
It's the DLC talking point of the day.


JH
Evolution
2008-01-04 17:28:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:32:22 -0800 (PST), mikegold
Post by mikegold
As your lap dog Laurie would say, "cite."
Show me where the government of Israel has asked the United States to
attack Iran, not just the random Knesset member or general.
Shimon Peres, the President and member of the majority Kadima party,
just stated yesterday that he did not believe war with Iran would be
necessary
Hey Laurie - are you my lapdog?
As long as you don't bring up Hillary... ;)
Laurie
So, what does Hillary do after tonight?
JH
She has already started tweaking her message from experienced to 'ready
for change', which was introduced last night... She's ready to hit the
ground running, and it seems that's the concern people have about Obama.
She'll figure it out; she's smart, she can adapt. She's not a
one-trick pony like Obama and Edwards. Does that make her phony? Not
at all; she has a history we can all examine to prove she cares about
people.

She'll consistently come in second or third; Obama won't do well in the
South, but Edwards will. When it comes to the big states, she will be
doing well, and gain a lot of traction. I truly see no clear winner for
quite a while, despite the media's attempt to decide it from last
night's results. And she's got the money to continue.

She would do well to continue to have her team stand behind her as they
did last night, and continue to emphasize that she is ready from day
one. Who is Obama going to choose on his team? Will he pick competent,
experienced people?

But I'm afraid that this country may fall for Obama's charm and
inspiring, but insubstantive message. These are, after all, the people
who re-elected dubya.

I will continue to support her, but will be happy to support Obama if he
gets it, because he's smart too. I think Edwards is a phony, a snake,
who is backed by lawyers only interested in stopping the republicans
from limiting medical malpractice. Didn't like him last time with his
phony "two Americas" while living in the rich America. Not that someone
who is rich cannot be concerned with the poor, but what has he EVER done
for the poor in his life before running for president? Hillary has a
long history of helping children, through education and health care,
etc. He really doesn't add anything to the mix; Obama and Hillary got
it covered.

Laurie
gumboman
2008-01-04 18:32:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
She has already started tweaking her message from experienced to 'ready
for change', which was introduced last night... She's ready to hit the
ground running, and it seems that's the concern people have about Obama.
She'll figure it out; she's smart, she can adapt. She's not a
one-trick pony like Obama and Edwards. Does that make her phony? Not
at all; she has a history we can all examine to prove she cares about
people.
See, there you go again with the Edwards talk. That should really want
to make a lot of his supporters cross over for Hillary.
Post by Evolution
She'll consistently come in second or third; Obama won't do well in the
South, but Edwards will. When it comes to the big states, she will be
doing well, and gain a lot of traction. I truly see no clear winner for
quite a while, despite the media's attempt to decide it from last
night's results. And she's got the money to continue.
If she doesn't win it in the primaries, and pretty quickly, then she
ain't gonna win it.
Post by Evolution
She would do well to continue to have her team stand behind her as they
did last night, and continue to emphasize that she is ready from day
one. Who is Obama going to choose on his team? Will he pick competent,
experienced people?
Ready for what?
Post by Evolution
But I'm afraid that this country may fall for Obama's charm and
inspiring, but insubstantive message. These are, after all, the people
who re-elected dubya.
Duh, you're finally figuring that out. Of course, those are the same
people Hillary has been courting.
Post by Evolution
I will continue to support her, but will be happy to support Obama if he
gets it, because he's smart too.
LMAO.
Post by Evolution
I think Edwards is a phony, a snake,
who is backed by lawyers only interested in stopping the republicans
from limiting medical malpractice. Didn't like him last time with his
phony "two Americas" while living in the rich America. Not that someone
who is rich cannot be concerned with the poor, but what has he EVER done
for the poor in his life before running for president? Hillary has a
long history of helping children, through education and health care,
etc. He really doesn't add anything to the mix; Obama and Hillary got
it covered.
Hillary's toast is all I can say if this is what you all think. You
can't get elected (or nominated) at 30%.

Shit, FDR and JFK didn't come from the 'rich' America? No wonder the
D's keep getting their asses kicked.



JH
Evolution
2008-01-04 19:43:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
But I'm afraid that this country may fall for Obama's charm and
inspiring, but insubstantive message. These are, after all, the people
who re-elected dubya.
Duh, you're finally figuring that out. Of course, those are the same
people Hillary has been courting.
Sure, because they are a huge voting block.
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
I will continue to support her, but will be happy to support Obama if he
gets it, because he's smart too.
LMAO.
Post by Evolution
I think Edwards is a phony, a snake,
who is backed by lawyers only interested in stopping the republicans
from limiting medical malpractice. Didn't like him last time with his
phony "two Americas" while living in the rich America. Not that someone
who is rich cannot be concerned with the poor, but what has he EVER done
for the poor in his life before running for president? Hillary has a
long history of helping children, through education and health care,
etc. He really doesn't add anything to the mix; Obama and Hillary got
it covered.
Hillary's toast is all I can say if this is what you all think. You
can't get elected (or nominated) at 30%.
True. But Edwards doesn't have a lot of money... in fact, since he
accepted the limits, even if he wins more states, he won't have any
money to continue.

Laurie
gumboman
2008-01-05 00:33:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
Duh, you're finally figuring that out. Of course, those are the same
people Hillary has been courting.
Sure, because they are a huge voting block.
Hillary's posse has been playing this 'let get the independent' game
for so long they don't know anything else. Gore played it, Kerry
played it - all at the behest of the same people advising Hillary. How
many times do you people have to get your asses handed to you before
you figure out it's 'fools gold'?

Based on what I hear from people like you the Democratic Party
deserves to lose. It's a party populated by losers, advised by losers
and, outside of Edwards, doesn't appear to have an honest bone in its
body, at least not honest enough to give the electorate a clear
choice. To think of what we have today compared to the great Democrats
of the past is a sad, sad thing to witness.
Post by Evolution
True. But Edwards doesn't have a lot of money... in fact, since he
accepted the limits, even if he wins more states, he won't have any
money to continue.
Of course he doesn't. He doesn't feed at that corporate trough like
the rest of those pissants. Shit, put your bullshit detector on and
let me know if that doesn't tell you something.



JH
Evolution
2008-01-05 01:06:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
Post by gumboman
Duh, you're finally figuring that out. Of course, those are the same
people Hillary has been courting.
Sure, because they are a huge voting block.
Hillary's posse has been playing this 'let get the independent' game
for so long they don't know anything else. Gore played it, Kerry
played it - all at the behest of the same people advising Hillary. How
many times do you people have to get your asses handed to you before
you figure out it's 'fools gold'?
Maybe those who are involved in the political game are more
knowledgeable than you. Someone who goes after the left who don't
currently vote, is a gamble at best, a loser at worst. Hell, you can
inspire those folks all you want, but you can't lead non-voters to the
polls. So the smart ones go for those who vote.

Gore and Kerry failed because they failed to fight back against the
Rovian tactics, and they allowed the republicans to set the issues which
brought the numbnuts out to vote. Until/unless the dems figure out how
to appeal to these voters, they will continue to lose. I think that the
anti-republican sentiment will make up for whatever "issue of the day"
the republicans find to bring out the hate vote... this time it is the
illegal scapegoating. The dems have to make health care the issue which
makes people mad enough to vote.
Post by gumboman
Based on what I hear from people like you the Democratic Party
deserves to lose. It's a party populated by losers, advised by losers
and, outside of Edwards, doesn't appear to have an honest bone in its
body, at least not honest enough to give the electorate a clear
choice.
Edwards honest? It's an act. He is using dirty tricks to try and win
this thing. I had more respect for him until I found that out.

To think of what we have today compared to the great Democrats
Post by gumboman
of the past is a sad, sad thing to witness.
Yes, we need a leader. But who in their right mind would go through
what you have to go through to become president?
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
True. But Edwards doesn't have a lot of money... in fact, since he
accepted the limits, even if he wins more states, he won't have any
money to continue.
Of course he doesn't. He doesn't feed at that corporate trough like
the rest of those pissants. Shit, put your bullshit detector on and
let me know if that doesn't tell you something.
Oh, please... he feeds at the trough of corporate lawyers, who want to
continue feeding at the trough of malpractice lawsuits. Do you think
that these interests will mess with the current health care system?

Laurie
Post by gumboman
JH
SMBalloon
2008-01-04 21:32:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
She'll consistently come in second or third; Obama won't do well in the
South, but Edwards will.
I think Obama is positioned to do exceptionally well in the south.
Those who vote in southern Democratic primaries are disproportionately
black relative to other parts of the country, and they will probably
vote for Obama in droves now that they see Obama won in a nearly all
white state such as Iowa. For example, nearly half of those who voted
in the South Carolina Democratic primary in 2004 were black.

So if Obama could beat Hillary in an all white state, hard to see how
he won't also beat her in a state where half the voters in the
Democratic primary will be African American. And the same holds true
for many states in the south where blacks will comprise nearly half of
those voting in Democratic primaries.

If Obama defeats Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, then Hillary is in
a lot of trouble. As well, conservative white southern Democrats are
far fewer in number than before. White Democrats in the south are
increasingly young and more liberal than the southern white Democrats
of the past. So I think Obama should do fine among white southern
Democrats as well.

As for Edwards, I think he is definitely the phoniest politician
running for the nomination and possibly the phoniest pol I have ever
seen. I may be wrong, but I don't think his being from the south will
be much of an advantage in Democratic primaries in the south.

The aspect of Obama's victory in Iowa that surprised me the most was
that he apparently actually won more of the votes of women than did
Hillary Clinton. Not in a million years did I think that was possible
with Hillary being the one female candidate against many male
contenders and being so far ahead in the national polls as she was.
Evolution
2008-01-04 22:14:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by SMBalloon
Post by Evolution
She'll consistently come in second or third; Obama won't do well in the
South, but Edwards will.
I think Obama is positioned to do exceptionally well in the south.
Those who vote in southern Democratic primaries are disproportionately
black relative to other parts of the country, and they will probably
vote for Obama in droves now that they see Obama won in a nearly all
white state such as Iowa. For example, nearly half of those who voted
in the South Carolina Democratic primary in 2004 were black.
Yes, you're right. I guess I was thinking in the general election.

Laurie
SMBalloon
2008-01-04 22:32:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by SMBalloon
Post by Evolution
She'll consistently come in second or third; Obama won't do well in the
South, but Edwards will.
I think Obama is positioned to do exceptionally well in the south.
Those who vote in southern Democratic primaries are disproportionately
black relative to other parts of the country, and they will probably
vote for Obama in droves now that they see Obama won in a nearly all
white state such as Iowa. For example, nearly half of those who voted
in the South Carolina Democratic primary in 2004 were black.
Yes, you're right. I guess I was thinking in the general election.
While I don't think Obama would win the south in the general election,
I do think he would probably do better in the south in the general
election than any of the other Democrats running. Edwards in all
probability would not have been able to win reelection to the senate
in North Carolina. And he's running far more to the left than he ran
in 2004. As for the viability of black Democrats in statewide races
in the south -- look at Harold Ford Jr. who barely lost a U.S. senate
race in conservative Tennesee in 2006. Harold Ford Jr. won 48% of the
vote. And Tennesee is considerably less black than many other
southern states.
Charles Board
2008-01-04 23:26:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by SMBalloon
While I don't think Obama would win the south in the general election,
I do think he would probably do better in the south in the general
election than any of the other Democrats running. Edwards in all
probability would not have been able to win reelection to the senate
in North Carolina.
This is simply not true he would've won re-elction in a waltz. Even
*Fox News*
conceded that:
"In the senate race, the Republicans gained the seat formerly held by
John Edwards .
If Edwards had run for reelection against Republican Richard Burr, it
appears Edwards
would have held on to his seat by a 53 percent — 47 percent margin.
Seven percent of
those voters that would have voted for Edwards voted for Burr."

(Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137521,00.html )

And even that is probably understating the margin as that 7% number is
WITH Edwards
having been strongly identified with Kerry nonstop for months leading up to the
election. Running on his own without the drag of Kerry that number only
goes up...
Post by SMBalloon
And he's running far more to the left than he ran
in 2004.
No, he's NOT running to the left of Kerry/Edwards. He IS running a
more populist
race..but the South has a strong populist streak that hat could tap into.

Not a doubt in my mind that Edwards does better in the South than
Obama. But then
I think - as most of the hypothetical dead-to-head Dem vs Repub matchup polling
suggests - that Edwards does much, much better NATIONALLY than Obama or
Clinton.
Post by SMBalloon
As for the viability of black Democrats in statewide races
in the south -- look at Harold Ford Jr. who barely lost a U.S. senate
race in conservative Tennesee in 2006. Harold Ford Jr. won 48% of the
vote. And Tennesee is considerably less black than many other
southern states.
Denise
2008-01-04 23:34:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by SMBalloon
As for the viability of black Democrats in statewide races
in the south -- look at Harold Ford Jr. who barely lost a U.S. senate race in conservative Tennesee in 2006. �Harold Ford Jr. won 48% of the vote. �And Tennesee is considerably less black than many other southern states.- >
Helllllloooo neighbor,
why would you argue with people who told us 8 years ago that Dubya was
da man? ;-)

Myself, I subscribe to the Bill Maher theory- when was the last time
they were right about anything?
gumboman
2008-01-05 00:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise
Post by SMBalloon
As for the viability of black Democrats in statewide races
in the south -- look at Harold Ford Jr. who barely lost a U.S. senate race in conservative Tennesee in 2006. ?Harold Ford Jr. won 48% of the vote. ?And Tennesee is considerably less black than many other southern states.- >
Helllllloooo neighbor,
why would you argue with people who told us 8 years ago that Dubya was
da man? ;-)
Myself, I subscribe to the Bill Maher theory- when was the last time
they were right about anything?
LMAO - Maher is the man.



JH
Evolution
2008-01-05 00:17:58 UTC
Permalink
Charles Board wrote:
But then
Post by Charles Board
I think - as most of the hypothetical dead-to-head Dem vs Repub matchup polling
suggests - that Edwards does much, much better NATIONALLY than Obama or
Clinton.
Yeah, but those polls aren't very accurate. Hillary and Obama have more
negatives than Edwards, and the republicans they put them against aren't
well known to them. Once they get to know the negatives of the
republicans, and Edwards, these polls will change dramatically. Also,
how many in here have said they wouldn't vote for Hillary under any
circumstances, but if faced with the actual choice of voting for an
evangelical or maniac like Giuliani, would hold their nose and vote for
her if she won the nomination...

Laurie
gumboman
2008-01-05 00:39:04 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 18:26:56 -0500, Charles Board
Post by Charles Board
No, he's NOT running to the left of Kerry/Edwards. He IS running a
more populist
race..but the South has a strong populist streak that hat could tap into.
Exactly - and that's the problem. The Democrats quit tapping into it
in hopes of getting the ex-Klan vote.

That's also where Huckabee is going to get a lot of votes in the
South. He's just mixing in a little 'speaking in tongues' with his
brand of populism.

Was there ever a bigger populist than LBJ or some of the other old
Democratic politicians that came out of Texas?
Post by Charles Board
Not a doubt in my mind that Edwards does better in the South than
Obama. But then
I think - as most of the hypothetical dead-to-head Dem vs Repub matchup polling
suggests - that Edwards does much, much better NATIONALLY than Obama or
Clinton.
I tend to agree.



JH
gumboman
2008-01-05 00:35:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by SMBalloon
As for the viability of black Democrats in statewide races
in the south -- look at Harold Ford Jr. who barely lost a U.S. senate
race in conservative Tennesee in 2006. Harold Ford Jr. won 48% of the
vote. And Tennesee is considerably less black than many other
southern states.
Shit, Uncle Harold lost in a year of a Democratic landslide elsewhere
while being advised by the same group of clowns advising Hillary.

How fucking stupid is that guy?



JH
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
2008-01-05 00:42:56 UTC
Permalink
Ford tried to run to the right of Corker. Talk about dumb. If you
remember, the day Jersey made civil unions legal, Ford came out with a
statement denouncing it. WTF does something in Jersey have to do with
TN? The other dumb thing Ford did was try to confront Corker at one
of his campaign stops. It didn't play well to the electorate. Made
Ford look desperate. Also, Ford is now head of the losers called the
DLC.
Post by gumboman
Post by SMBalloon
As for the viability of black Democrats in statewide races
in the south -- look at Harold Ford Jr. who barely lost a U.S. senate
race in conservative Tennesee in 2006. Harold Ford Jr. won 48% of the
vote. And Tennesee is considerably less black than many other
southern states.
Shit, Uncle Harold lost in a year of a Democratic landslide elsewhere
while being advised by the same group of clowns advising Hillary.
How fucking stupid is that guy?
JH
gumboman
2008-01-05 00:25:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
She has already started tweaking her message from experienced to 'ready
for change', which was introduced last night... She's ready to hit the
ground running, and it seems that's the concern people have about Obama.
She'll figure it out; she's smart, she can adapt. She's not a
one-trick pony like Obama and Edwards. Does that make her phony? Not
at all; she has a history we can all examine to prove she cares about
people.
She'll consistently come in second or third; Obama won't do well in the
South, but Edwards will.
Actually, in Democratic primaries in the South Obama will do well,
probably better than Hillary. Now, when it comes to the general
election, well, it will be fun to watch.
Post by Evolution
When it comes to the big states, she will be
doing well, and gain a lot of traction. I truly see no clear winner for
quite a while, despite the media's attempt to decide it from last
night's results. And she's got the money to continue.
Hopefully, there's no clear winner until the convention.
Post by Evolution
She would do well to continue to have her team stand behind her as they
did last night, and continue to emphasize that she is ready from day
one. Who is Obama going to choose on his team? Will he pick competent,
experienced people?
Her team? That's her fucking problem. What a bunch of losers.
Post by Evolution
But I'm afraid that this country may fall for Obama's charm and
inspiring, but insubstantive message. These are, after all, the people
who re-elected dubya.
I don't find him charming or inspiring at all. It looks to me like the
R's (independents, whatever) are going to do all they can to get him
the nomination and then blast his ass in the general.

If Hillary is so fucking smart how did she fall into this trap?


JH
Evolution
2008-01-05 00:41:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
She has already started tweaking her message from experienced to 'ready
for change', which was introduced last night... She's ready to hit the
ground running, and it seems that's the concern people have about Obama.
She'll figure it out; she's smart, she can adapt. She's not a
one-trick pony like Obama and Edwards. Does that make her phony? Not
at all; she has a history we can all examine to prove she cares about
people.
She'll consistently come in second or third; Obama won't do well in the
South, but Edwards will.
Actually, in Democratic primaries in the South Obama will do well,
probably better than Hillary. Now, when it comes to the general
election, well, it will be fun to watch.
Yes, my mistake... as balloon pointed out...
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
When it comes to the big states, she will be
doing well, and gain a lot of traction. I truly see no clear winner for
quite a while, despite the media's attempt to decide it from last
night's results. And she's got the money to continue.
Hopefully, there's no clear winner until the convention.
Edwards cannot last that long, unless he wins either of the next 2
primaries. It's the same thing last time, and he's out of money. Even
if he manages to stay in, he'll hit his spending limits.
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
She would do well to continue to have her team stand behind her as they
did last night, and continue to emphasize that she is ready from day
one. Who is Obama going to choose on his team? Will he pick competent,
experienced people?
Her team? That's her fucking problem. What a bunch of losers.
I think they did pretty well with Bill... and she also has Wes Clark.
Post by gumboman
Post by Evolution
But I'm afraid that this country may fall for Obama's charm and
inspiring, but insubstantive message. These are, after all, the people
who re-elected dubya.
I don't find him charming or inspiring at all. It looks to me like the
R's (independents, whatever) are going to do all they can to get him
the nomination and then blast his ass in the general.
Hmmm, he's getting rock star receptions, so he's obviously inspiring
some people. But I agree that the Rs (and the media) are pushing him.
It will make a better story when he gets bloodied in the fight.
Post by gumboman
If Hillary is so fucking smart how did she fall into this trap?
I'm not sure what you mean. No one can predict how a campaign will go.
All you can do is react to changes/developments.

Laurie
Post by gumboman
JH
Evolution
2007-12-13 01:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
First of all, the Jewish people were given back the land that was
theirs to begin with many many years ago. They were given a dried up
old piece of land that no one really wanted and they turned it into a
prosperous country.
Except the arabs who were living there and kicked off their land...

Then the Palastinians wanted it badly.

Why wouldn't they want the land which was taken from them?

Israel has
Post by D***@aol.com
taken land in wars, yes. Israel defended itself during the 6 day war
and that is when they took they were attacked they took the Gaza
Strip, Golan Heights and the West Bank. Spoils of war.
You do realize that Israel wasn't attacked. They made the first strike
in that war, despite their attempts to make it look like they were
attacked. You might as well say that Japan was attacked in WWII and
therefore justified in the Pearl Harbor attack, because we were amassing
planes and ships on their border.


You can't
Post by D***@aol.com
just set up to destroy a country and then cry about it when you lose
something.
So you think spoils of war are justified? So we are justified in
occupying Afghanistan because of 9/11? Civilized society has pretty
much rejected the idea of "spoils of war".

Why is it that no Arab country wants to take in the
Post by D***@aol.com
"Palestinians," many of whom migrated into the West Bank from several
Arab nations AFTER Israel became a state? They migrated in from Iraq,
Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan, etc.
Cite?


I don't even know where to begin with this paragraph; it is so wrong...

If your argument is that Israel didn't
Post by D***@aol.com
have that land for a long long time...
Look, the Israelis supposedly lived in that area 2000 years ago. We
took land from the Native Americans only 400 years ago, so won't you
please give your land back to them? Would you be happy about that? Do
you think that would be justified, to make all Americans give up their
land to the natives who once lived where you live?

well what about those migrants
Post by D***@aol.com
who came into the West Bank? Many of those people had never lived
there EVER. And NOW they want land from Israel.
Israel was created out of land which was occupied by Arabs for thousands
of years. There *were* people living there, and their land was taken
away. Then Israel attacked its neighbors and stole even more land from
them... as a buffer, they say. But then they went and settled it,
eliminating the buffer, and now they are building a wall around the
stolen land, incorporating it on their side of the wall. And the wall
is even *built* on stolen land.

They want part of
Post by D***@aol.com
Jerusalem so they can destroy historical sites that are holy to more
than a few religions. No thanks.
Oh, please... where were you brainwashed? In Joe's school of
anti-islamowhacks? Jerusalem is holy to the Muslims, as well as the
Christians. It is the holy city of all these religions because they all
stemmed from the same place and branched off.
Post by D***@aol.com
If you are comfortable using Israel as the root of all evils because
it is what you are used to or because you find it easy.
No, if Israel would give the land back they stole, and dismantle the
Wall which is built on arab land and re-build it on their own fucking
land, not only would people like Gumboman and I not have a problem with
Israel, but it most likely would bring peace to the middle east.

For you to
Post by D***@aol.com
seem pleased or supportive of Iraq or Lebanon or any other Arab
country wiping out Israel is really scary.
Right, because if you don't support Israel's aggressive terrorist
tactics, you want them to disappear. Those are the only two choices.

That's what we need right
Post by D***@aol.com
now in this world....more Arab nations in power that hate our guts.
To me, people like you are scarier than anyone else. You have the
ability to educate yourself.
You're the one who needs education. Read Jimmy Carter's book for a start.

You have the ability to really
Post by D***@aol.com
investigate things and see what truly goes on...yet you choose to just
spew out hatred that is unfounded.
Gumboman, as you stated: "do
you really expect a group, any group, to simply roll over and play
nice when foreigners give their land to someone else that has been
mostly gone for a couple thousand years? Can you name me a single
indigenous group on the planet that would accept that happening to
them? If not, why would you expect it of Arabs? "
Most of those Arabs did NOT live in the West Bank or many of the
"Palestinians" lived elsewhere in other countries, never having lived
in what they now consider "Palestine."
Really? So who lived on that land when they gave it to Israel? Do you
think it was empty?

So do YOU really expect any
Post by D***@aol.com
group to simply roll over and play nice when FOREIGNERS try to invade
their land?? Under the premise of your own argument...Israel should
not just roll over and give up land to people who really are
foreigners to that area.
Absurd. Israel is the one who stole more land after they were given land.
Post by D***@aol.com
If you are going to apply your theory to one group....I suppose you
should apply it to all...or it just MIGHT seem like you are somewhat
prejudice..and I am sure that you arent....right?
Peace,
Debbie
Laurie
Michael
2007-12-21 17:27:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by D***@aol.com
First of all, the Jewish people were given back the land that was
theirs to begin with many many years ago. They were given a dried up
old piece of land that no one really wanted and they turned it into a
prosperous country.
Except the arabs who were living there and kicked off their land...
Then the Palastinians wanted it badly.
Why wouldn't they want the land which was taken from them?
Israel has
Post by D***@aol.com
taken land in wars, yes. Israel defended itself during the 6 day war
and that is when they took they were attacked they took the Gaza
Strip, Golan Heights and the West Bank. Spoils of war.
You do realize that Israel wasn't attacked. They made the first strike
in that war, despite their attempts to make it look like they were
attacked. You might as well say that Japan was attacked in WWII and
therefore justified in the Pearl Harbor attack, because we were
amassing planes and ships on their border.
You can't
Post by D***@aol.com
just set up to destroy a country and then cry about it when you lose
something.
So you think spoils of war are justified? So we are justified in
occupying Afghanistan because of 9/11? Civilized society has pretty
much rejected the idea of "spoils of war".
Why is it that no Arab country wants to take in the
Post by D***@aol.com
"Palestinians," many of whom migrated into the West Bank from several
Arab nations AFTER Israel became a state? They migrated in from Iraq,
Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan, etc.
Cite?
I don't even know where to begin with this paragraph; it is so wrong...
If your argument is that Israel didn't
Post by D***@aol.com
have that land for a long long time...
Look, the Israelis supposedly lived in that area 2000 years ago. We
took land from the Native Americans only 400 years ago, so won't you
please give your land back to them? Would you be happy about that? Do
you think that would be justified, to make all Americans give up their
land to the natives who once lived where you live?
well what about those migrants
Post by D***@aol.com
who came into the West Bank? Many of those people had never lived
there EVER. And NOW they want land from Israel.
Israel was created out of land which was occupied by Arabs for
thousands of years. There *were* people living there, and their land
was taken away. Then Israel attacked its neighbors and stole even more
land from them... as a buffer, they say. But then they went and
settled it, eliminating the buffer, and now they are building a wall
around the stolen land, incorporating it on their side of the wall.
And the wall is even *built* on stolen land.
They want part of
Post by D***@aol.com
Jerusalem so they can destroy historical sites that are holy to more
than a few religions. No thanks.
Oh, please... where were you brainwashed? In Joe's school of
anti-islamowhacks? Jerusalem is holy to the Muslims, as well as the
Christians. It is the holy city of all these religions because they
all stemmed from the same place and branched off.
Post by D***@aol.com
If you are comfortable using Israel as the root of all evils because
it is what you are used to or because you find it easy.
No, if Israel would give the land back they stole, and dismantle the
Wall which is built on arab land and re-build it on their own fucking
land, not only would people like Gumboman and I not have a problem with
Israel, but it most likely would bring peace to the middle east.
For you to
Post by D***@aol.com
seem pleased or supportive of Iraq or Lebanon or any other Arab
country wiping out Israel is really scary.
Right, because if you don't support Israel's aggressive terrorist
tactics, you want them to disappear. Those are the only two choices.
That's what we need right
Post by D***@aol.com
now in this world....more Arab nations in power that hate our guts.
To me, people like you are scarier than anyone else. You have the
ability to educate yourself.
You're the one who needs education. Read Jimmy Carter's book for a start.
You have the ability to really
Post by D***@aol.com
investigate things and see what truly goes on...yet you choose to just
spew out hatred that is unfounded.
Gumboman, as you stated: "do
you really expect a group, any group, to simply roll over and play
nice when foreigners give their land to someone else that has been
mostly gone for a couple thousand years? Can you name me a single
indigenous group on the planet that would accept that happening to
them? If not, why would you expect it of Arabs? "
Most of those Arabs did NOT live in the West Bank or many of the
"Palestinians" lived elsewhere in other countries, never having lived
in what they now consider "Palestine."
Really? So who lived on that land when they gave it to Israel? Do you
think it was empty?
So do YOU really expect any
Post by D***@aol.com
group to simply roll over and play nice when FOREIGNERS try to invade
their land?? Under the premise of your own argument...Israel should
not just roll over and give up land to people who really are
foreigners to that area.
Absurd. Israel is the one who stole more land after they were given land.
Post by D***@aol.com
If you are going to apply your theory to one group....I suppose you
should apply it to all...or it just MIGHT seem like you are somewhat
prejudice..and I am sure that you arent....right?
Peace,
Debbie
Laurie
“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and
remove all doubt.”
Joe
2007-12-13 00:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by gumboman
LMAO - If I were a placing abet on the outcome I would bet just the
opposite. I think Iraq and Lebanon showed they not only can, but will,
change 'that'. Now that they know how to fight a conventional military
they'll never accept an Israeli state based on religion. Arafat will
be vindicated - the Israelis should have made a deal when they had the
chance.
What makes you think that Israel will fight a conventional war if
their existence was threatened? They might just nuke the whole
fucking mess over there. That's exactly what they should do if the
Arab world ganged up on them.
Post by gumboman
So, what kind of odds will you give me? We'll put the bet in an
envelope and leave it for our descendants a hundred years from now to
see who wins the bet.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Jews were destroyed. That's been
the long range plan for centuries now. That don't make it right. It'll
just be another cross of shame for the world to bear. Just like the
Holocaust...
Evolution
2007-12-13 01:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
LMAO - If I were a placing abet on the outcome I would bet just the
opposite. I think Iraq and Lebanon showed they not only can, but will,
change 'that'. Now that they know how to fight a conventional military
they'll never accept an Israeli state based on religion. Arafat will
be vindicated - the Israelis should have made a deal when they had the
chance.
What makes you think that Israel will fight a conventional war if
their existence was threatened? They might just nuke the whole
fucking mess over there. That's exactly what they should do if the
Arab world ganged up on them.
No, they wouldn't. Because the radiation that would let loose is not
going to stay on arab lands. We bombed Afghanistan back to the stone
ages, and yet, we are still losing that war. Israel will have no better
success than Russia or the US are having in taking over countries, no
more success than we had in Vietnam. Because you can't invade another
country or steal their land and win in these days of guerilla fighting.
If the Native Americans had had internet access, we'd all be speaking
Cherokee or some other language now.
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
So, what kind of odds will you give me? We'll put the bet in an
envelope and leave it for our descendants a hundred years from now to
see who wins the bet.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Jews were destroyed. That's been
the long range plan for centuries now. That don't make it right. It'll
just be another cross of shame for the world to bear. Just like the
Holocaust...
Maybe they should stop stealing land and persecuting the occupants if
they want to survive... and I'm talking about Israel, not Jews, but it
was a nice segue from talking about Israel to talking about Jews. There
are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel and Jews are in no danger of
being "wiped out". But a country which steals land from its neighbors
and persecutes the people whose land they are occupying, doesn't deserve
respect. And neither do people like you who accuse critics of this
behavior of being anti-semitic.


Laurie
m***@gmail.com
2007-12-13 01:44:22 UTC
Permalink
There are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel...
Anyone wanna sell Laurie a clue?
Here's one for free: The Jewish population of Tel Aviv is 4 times the
Jewish population of LA.
A to Z
2007-12-13 03:45:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
There are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel...
Anyone wanna sell Laurie a clue?
Here's one for free: The Jewish population of Tel Aviv is 4 times the
Jewish population of LA.
however, the Irish population of Dubuque is higher than the Andorran
presence in Swaziland.
m***@gmail.com
2007-12-13 04:04:44 UTC
Permalink
On Dec 12, 10:45 pm, "A to Z"
Post by A to Z
Post by m***@gmail.com
There are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel...
Anyone wanna sell Laurie a clue?
Here's one for free: The Jewish population of Tel Aviv is 4 times the
Jewish population of LA.
however, the Irish population of Dubuque is higher than the Andorran
presence in Swaziland.
No clues for sale, then?
A to Z
2007-12-13 04:09:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
On Dec 12, 10:45 pm, "A to Z"
Post by A to Z
Post by m***@gmail.com
There are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel...
Anyone wanna sell Laurie a clue?
Here's one for free: The Jewish population of Tel Aviv is 4 times the
Jewish population of LA.
however, the Irish population of Dubuque is higher than the Andorran
presence in Swaziland.
No clues for sale, then?
http://tinyurl.com/fagnr
m***@gmail.com
2007-12-13 04:19:42 UTC
Permalink
On Dec 12, 11:09 pm, "A to Z"
Post by A to Z
Post by m***@gmail.com
On Dec 12, 10:45 pm, "A to Z"
Post by A to Z
Post by m***@gmail.com
There are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel...
Anyone wanna sell Laurie a clue?
Here's one for free: The Jewish population of Tel Aviv is 4 times the
Jewish population of LA.
however, the Irish population of Dubuque is higher than the Andorran
presence in Swaziland.
No clues for sale, then?
http://tinyurl.com/fagnr
Did you read those instructions??? Clues are hard!!
Dan
2007-12-13 07:08:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by A to Z
however, the Irish population of Dubuque is higher than the Andorran
presence in Swaziland.
Cite!
--
Dan
A to Z
2007-12-13 21:35:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by A to Z
however, the Irish population of Dubuque is higher than the Andorran
presence in Swaziland.
Cite!
http://news.google.com/news?tab=wn&hl=en&ned=us&q=irish+andorra+swaziland+dubuque
"Your search - irish andorra swaziland dubuque - did not match any
documents"
Evolution
2007-12-13 17:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
There are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel...
Anyone wanna sell Laurie a clue?
Here's one for free: The Jewish population of Tel Aviv is 4 times the
Jewish population of LA.
My bad, I heard that somewhere... however, there ARE more Jews in the US
than in Israel... 6.5 million in the US vs 4.95 million in Israel

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/world-jewish-population.htm

Metropolitan Tel Aviv, with 2.5 million Jews, is the world's largest
Jewish city. It is followed by New York, with 1.9 million

The point is, Jews are in no danger of being "wiped out" which is what I
was responding to.

Laurie
Evan Z
2007-12-13 20:06:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
The point is, Jews are in no danger of being "wiped out" which is what I
was responding to.
What a relief.
--
ez
Joe
2007-12-15 02:40:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
The point is, Jews are in no danger of being "wiped out" which is what I
was responding to.
Laurie
That should come as a great relief to the 4.5 million in Israel. At
least their cousins in Brookly will survive....
Evolution
2007-12-16 20:15:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by Evolution
The point is, Jews are in no danger of being "wiped out" which is what I
was responding to.
Laurie
That should come as a great relief to the 4.5 million in Israel. At
least their cousins in Brookly will survive....
I would suggest that those Jews living in Israel should choose a
government who will give the land back, build a wall on their own
property, and stop persecuting the neighbors. Why should the US support
an illegal occupation and persecution of Arabs?

Laurie
Michael
2007-12-21 17:29:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
Post by m***@gmail.com
There are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel...
Anyone wanna sell Laurie a clue?
Here's one for free: The Jewish population of Tel Aviv is 4 times the
Jewish population of LA.
My bad, I heard that somewhere... however, there ARE more Jews in the
US than in Israel... 6.5 million in the US vs 4.95 million in Israel
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/world-jewish-population.htm
Metropolitan Tel Aviv, with 2.5 million Jews, is the world's largest
Jewish city. It is followed by New York, with 1.9 million
The point is, Jews are in no danger of being "wiped out" which is what
I was responding to.
Laurie
Tell that to a Holocaust survivor.
SMBalloon
2007-12-13 01:52:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evolution
There
are more Jews in Los Angeles than in Israel
Not even close. There are about 10 times as many Jews in Israel as
the Los Angeles metro area.
gumboman
2007-12-13 04:40:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
LMAO - If I were a placing abet on the outcome I would bet just the
opposite. I think Iraq and Lebanon showed they not only can, but will,
change 'that'. Now that they know how to fight a conventional military
they'll never accept an Israeli state based on religion. Arafat will
be vindicated - the Israelis should have made a deal when they had the
chance.
What makes you think that Israel will fight a conventional war if
their existence was threatened? They might just nuke the whole
fucking mess over there. That's exactly what they should do if the
Arab world ganged up on them.
Nice. I guess we know now why other countries are wanting nukes.

They'll have to do what they have to do. As long as the US stays out
of it then I'm OK with whatever they think is best.
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
So, what kind of odds will you give me? We'll put the bet in an
envelope and leave it for our descendants a hundred years from now to
see who wins the bet.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Jews were destroyed. That's been
the long range plan for centuries now. That don't make it right. It'll
just be another cross of shame for the world to bear. Just like the
Holocaust...
Whose long range plan for centuries? I hate being not told about
conspiracies. :)

Try that guilt trip on someone else. I wasn't alive during the
Holocaust just like I wasn't alive during slavery so I don't feel any
guilt nor will I bear any crosses because of the decisions made by
others. Am I supposed to feel guilty because Santa Anna got his ass
kicked also?

Nice try though :)



JH
gumboman
2007-12-11 03:23:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
If what Joe says is true though it's almost statistically impossible
for every single outside group on the planet to decide to use the same
scapegoat unless some other forces are at work. What do YOU think are
those forces?
Jew hatred...plain and simple.
Everything stems from the old bullshit..."they killed our God"
they kidnapped christian kids
they poisoned the wells
they caused the plague
they control the wealth
they're all bankers
they stole our land...
etc etc etc
And this has exactly what to do with Arabs/Islam? Because they won't
accept that they should be made to pay the price for what happened to
the Jews in Europe what happens? Do you intend to have the US/Israel
kill all of them?

What do you foresee as the endgame?


JH
Evolution
2007-12-11 03:57:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by gumboman
If what Joe says is true though it's almost statistically impossible
for every single outside group on the planet to decide to use the same
scapegoat unless some other forces are at work. What do YOU think are
those forces?
Jew hatred...plain and simple.
Everything stems from the old bullshit..."they killed our God"
they kidnapped christian kids
they poisoned the wells
they caused the plague
they control the wealth
they're all bankers
they stole our land...
Not everything. *Israel* as a political entity DID steal land. Has
nothing to do with them being Jewish. It's still wrong.

Laurie
Post by Joe
etc etc etc
Calvin Jones & the 13th Apostle
2007-12-10 03:23:15 UTC
Permalink
Huckabee? Jeebus, can't the Republicans find a sane candidate?
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Joe
Post by D***@aol.com
Isn't Global Warming caused by the Israeli's also??? : )
Peace,
Debbie
Teenage pregnancy also :-)
AIDS is an Israeli plot, someone said. Just to be safe, maybe we
oughta brand all of 'em with tattoos on their arms. Call it a
Huckabee.
Loading...