re: alain's message on israel

  • Thread starter LoafingOaf - Yipee-ki-yay, muthafuckas
  • Start date
> The fact is, no one has cited me a UN Security Counsel resolution
> analogous to the resolutions on Iraq. Come on now, their web site is easy
> to navigate. I maintain that the obligations of both parties in the
> Israel-Palestinian conflict is to negotiate in good faith a peaceful
> settlement so that Israel's security can be protected and the occupied
> land can be returned. And I quoted the UN Security Counsel to back me up.
> And I believe one side of that conflict has made attempts to do so,
> whereas the other has not. And I believe that the "road map to
> peace" plan championed by Tony Blair and most of the *civilized*
> world is the reasonable, fair path that should be followed from here. You
> guys can go on with your "Israel is a nazi state" and
> "America is in the hands of zionists" bullshit, but I don't see
> how such a mentality is constructive.

well they still haven't found any WMDs, so there goes the whole legal basis for the war. so what is your point exactly? furthermore, are you saying that because there are no resolutions that directly correspond to ones imposed on iraq, israel does not have to obey them?

and remember, you did complain about france threatening to use its veto power. why is it that france shouldn't use it in the case of iraq, but the united states can abuse it in the case of israel?

now i've never said israel is a nazi state (although they sure seem to have adopted some rather fascist policies) and i don't think that america is in the hands of zionists, but i do think there is an unfair bias in favor of israel. hello? have you forgotten that we're supposed to be neutral yet continue to supply israel with arms? palestinian terrorism, as i've said before, is tragic and unfortunate, but i can see why they'd see it as a last resort considering what they're up against.

> Already have. I posted about that in depth many, many months ago, before
> this crisis had ever even come up (that is, before it was fashionable). I
> believe it was in a Robert Evans thread about Islam, in reply to something
> someone posted about Turkey being secularized or whatever. And it is our
> good fortune Turkey turned our troops down in this war. Don't want them
> involved at all. I don't approve of Turkey at all, and I don't approve of
> the fact that America has some influence on Turkey and they have - at
> least to my knowledge - let their human rights record slide. I like that
> the Europe has given Turkey a hard time about joining the EU.

well that's something at least. can you now explain to me why our government seems to fully approve of turkey and is only now saying that we didn't want their help anyway (after actively seeking it)?
 
> oh and oaf, if you care so much about the kurds, how come i've never seen
> you condemn turkey's efforts at exterminating them?

Now that I'm thinking of it, I remember posting A LOT on that subject. I went into a whole thing on Turkey and the Kurds, with detailed descriptions of what sepcifically they've been up to. I was f***ing ALL ABOUT slamming Turkey. But really only because at the time I just happened to be reading a book on the history of the Kurds.

BTW, to change the subject entirely, I was reading something from George Orwell and it sorta made me think of something you said recently. I don't remember what message, but it was one of your boastful "I am such a brave rebel for not buying into all that shit the government says about Iraq" deals.

And it also made me think of yesterday's Drudge Report, which said that journalist Stephen BRill is getting yelled at by friends as word gets around that in his upcoming book he praises Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge as an honest, hard-working guy doing a serious and solid job for very little thanks. Because in the circles Brill hangs out in, Ridge is assumed to be a moron, even though he rose from very humble, working class roots to graduating with honors from Harvard.

Orwell, in comments about novelist Evelyn Waugh, wrote:

>>>>
Within the past few decades, in countries like Britain or the United States, the literary intelligentsia has grown large enough to constitute a world in itself. One important result of this is that opinions which a writer feels frightened of expressing are not those which are disapproved of by society as a whole. To a great extent, what is still loosely thought of as heterodoxy has become orthodoxy. It is nonsense to pretend, for instance, that at this date there is something daring and original in proclaiming yourself an anarchist, an atheist, a pacifist, etc. The daring thing, or at any rate the unfashionable thing, is to believe in God or to approve of the capitalist system. In 1895, when Oscar Wilde was jailed, it must have needed very considerable moral courage to defend homosexuality. Today it would need no courage at all: today the equivalent action would be, perhaps, to defend antisemitism. But this example that I have chosen immediately reminds one of something else - namely, that one cannot judge the value of an opinion simply by the amount of courage that is required in holding it.
 
> well they still haven't found any WMDs, so there goes the whole legal
> basis for the war.

All in due course, Mindy.

>so what is your point exactly? furthermore, are you
> saying that because there are no resolutions that directly correspond to
> ones imposed on iraq, israel does not have to obey them?

No, I'm saying that the dude who said "There are UN resolutions on ISrael, how come the USA isn't bombing them?" made an asinine point, because there's nothing like 1441 concerning Israel.

> and remember, you did complain about france threatening to use its veto
> power. why is it that france shouldn't use it in the case of iraq, but the
> united states can abuse it in the case of israel?

I'd have to judge that on a case-by-case basis. I thought France was in bad faith. I don't know which U.S. vetoes you're talking about, specifically.

> well that's something at least. can you now explain to me why our
> government seems to fully approve of turkey and is only now saying that we
> didn't want their help anyway (after actively seeking it)?

I don't know that they "fully approve" of Turkey, but I guess they care more about strategic interests.
 
oaf proves once again that he's full of shit!

> Now that I'm thinking of it, I remember posting A LOT on that subject. I
> went into a whole thing on Turkey and the Kurds, with detailed
> descriptions of what sepcifically they've been up to. I was f***ing ALL
> ABOUT slamming Turkey. But really only because at the time I just happened
> to be reading a book on the history of the Kurds.

i don't believe i was active on this site when you posted that stuff. you said it was a while back. and to my knowledge, you had been silent on the subject when myself and others had brought it up -- until this thread that is.

> BTW, to change the subject entirely, I was reading something from George
> Orwell and it sorta made me think of something you said recently. I don't
> remember what message, but it was one of your boastful "I am such a
> brave rebel for not buying into all that shit the government says about
> Iraq" deals.

now when on earth did i say i was a brave rebel? i see you're up to your old tricks again.

> And it also made me think of yesterday's Drudge Report, which said that
> journalist Stephen BRill is getting yelled at by friends as word gets
> around that in his upcoming book he praises Homeland Security chief Tom
> Ridge as an honest, hard-working guy doing a serious and solid job for
> very little thanks. Because in the circles Brill hangs out in, Ridge is
> assumed to be a moron, even though he rose from very humble, working class
> roots to graduating with honors from Harvard.

your point being? hey, i am willing to make concessions about certain things. you seem to imply that i haven't conceded any points. sorry, no, but i am not unreasonable.

> Orwell, in comments about novelist Evelyn Waugh, wrote:
> Within the past few decades, in countries like Britain or the United
> States, the literary intelligentsia has grown large enough to constitute a
> world in itself. One important result of this is that opinions which a
> writer feels frightened of expressing are not those which are disapproved
> of by society as a whole. To a great extent, what is still loosely thought
> of as heterodoxy has become orthodoxy. It is nonsense to pretend, for
> instance, that at this date there is something daring and original in
> proclaiming yourself an anarchist, an atheist, a pacifist, etc. The daring
> thing, or at any rate the unfashionable thing, is to believe in God or to
> approve of the capitalist system. In 1895, when Oscar Wilde was jailed, it
> must have needed very considerable moral courage to defend homosexuality.
> Today it would need no courage at all: today the equivalent action would
> be, perhaps, to defend antisemitism. But this example that I have chosen
> immediately reminds one of something else - namely, that one cannot judge
> the value of an opinion simply by the amount of courage that is required
> in holding it.
> Now, Mindy, is it really brave of you, a university student in, it
> seems, generally left-wing social circles to be against people owning
> guns, in favor of abortion, socialistic, anti-glabalization,
> anti-consumerism, anti-patriotism, and to view the Constitution as a
> "living" document? Is it brave to say we must show automatic
> respect the major religions so we don't offend anyone who believes in
> them? Is it brave to generally take an anti-American view of America's
> influence in the world? And is it brave to call Bush the names you call
> him, and to say Ashcroft is a fascist, and to oppose this war?

> I'm not criticizing all of these beliefs here. They're just some that I
> think I remember you holding (I could have some of them wrong...). I'm
> pro-choice on abortion myself, and am not a fan of Ashcroft, for example.
> But the point is, you fancy yourself this courageous rebel and act like
> that makes your views better, but it seems to me virtually every viewpoint
> I've seen you express would no doubt get you lots of pats on the back from
> your professors and fellow English Lit students. They're all pretty much
> in line with liberal to left wing political correctness and university
> culture. Am I wrong? And I bet if you came 'round holding Brill's book on
> the aftermath of 9/11 in America, and said, "You know, this Tom Ridge
> guy doesn't seem like such a retard, despite his looks, and you have to
> admit there hasn't been a 9/11 since 9/11," that you would experience
> considerably more ridicule than if you had poked fun at the Terror Alert
> color-coded warning system as is the fashion.

> I'm not saying Ridge isn't an idiot. I have no idea about him, and its
> beside the point. But I feel many of my beliefs are considerably more
> unfashionable in the circles I find myself in than yours are. Which isn't
> to say that makes them better beliefs because of that. Just that I'm met
> with a lot more hostility when I express some of my opinions than I bet
> you are.

you obviously haven't been keeping up much with my posts, for the claims of yourself and others claim that i am too prolific and post too much about myself. i don't move in liberal f***ing circles. USC is a pretty conservative school in general. i come from a conservative town. torrance is full of republicans. i come from an extremely conservative mormon background. my father makes his living purchasing parts for C-17s in the government sector of boeing. my brother is in JROTC. my great-grandfather was an informant during the McCarthy era. i never said i was brave to believe the things i do, but it has gotten me into more than a little bit of trouble at home. a lot of people at my school are very anti-war, but a lot of them are pro-war as well. most of the people who are anti-war, i admit, do it because it's hip. that's a big reason why i don't participate in related activities. i do my own research because i have an intellectual interest in the subject and i form my own opinions.

(when have i ever said ashcroft was a fascist by the way? more of your putting words into my mouth? i think so. but hey, the patriot acts are very very unconstitutional. that's undeniable. and when did i call tom ridge an idiot. please stop pulling stuff out of your ass.)

oh yeah, f*** off. i don't know where you get off trying to tell me about MY LIFE. you are a complete shithead.
 
> All in due course, Mindy.

we'll see.

> No, I'm saying that the dude who said "There are UN resolutions on
> ISrael, how come the USA isn't bombing them?" made an asinine point,
> because there's nothing like 1441 concerning Israel.

i don't think we should bomb israel, but israel should be held accountable for its actions.

> I'd have to judge that on a case-by-case basis. I thought France was in
> bad faith. I don't know which U.S. vetoes you're talking about,
> specifically.

have you completely ignored all the posts that make reference to and provide source information on the numerous vetoes the united states has used against resolutions pertaining to israel? apparently.

> I don't know that they "fully approve" of Turkey, but I guess
> they care more about strategic interests.

oh, you mean, economic interests. come on, baby, don't sugar coat it.

and one more thing, i shant be replying to anymore of your disgusting posts since you feel the need to make assertions about my personal life that are completely unfounded and unfair. asshole.
 
> have you completely ignored all the posts that make reference to and
> provide source information on the numerous vetoes the united states has
> used against resolutions pertaining to israel? apparently.

I don't read every message. Did somebody give specific facts about such an instance? I do know that there are many anti-Jewish countries in the UN who love to beat up on Israel in the General Assembly, so as a general rule it's probably good that there's a member state keeping that shit in check on the Security Counsel. But that doesn't mean I support every time America has vetoed something. I've never looked into it.
 
Re: oaf proves once again that he's full of shit!

> i don't believe i was active on this site when you posted that stuff. you
> said it was a while back. and to my knowledge, you had been silent on the
> subject when myself and others had brought it up -- until this thread that
> is.

> now when on earth did i say i was a brave rebel? i see you're up to your
> old tricks again.

> your point being? hey, i am willing to make concessions about certain
> things. you seem to imply that i haven't conceded any points. sorry, no,
> but i am not unreasonable.

> you obviously haven't been keeping up much with my posts, for the claims
> of yourself and others claim that i am too prolific and post too much
> about myself. i don't move in liberal f***ing circles. USC is a pretty
> conservative school in general. i come from a conservative town. torrance
> is full of republicans. i come from an extremely conservative mormon
> background. my father makes his living purchasing parts for C-17s in the
> government sector of boeing. my brother is in JROTC. my great-grandfather
> was an informant during the McCarthy era. i never said i was brave to
> believe the things i do, but it has gotten me into more than a little bit
> of trouble at home. a lot of people at my school are very anti-war, but a
> lot of them are pro-war as well. most of the people who are anti-war, i
> admit, do it because it's hip. that's a big reason why i don't participate
> in related activities. i do my own research because i have an intellectual
> interest in the subject and i form my own opinions.

> (when have i ever said ashcroft was a fascist by the way? more of your
> putting words into my mouth? i think so. but hey, the patriot acts are
> very very unconstitutional. that's undeniable. and when did i call tom
> ridge an idiot. please stop pulling stuff out of your ass.)

> oh yeah, f*** off. i don't know where you get off trying to tell me about
> MY LIFE. you are a complete shithead.

I didn't say you called Tom Ridge an idiot.

I dunno if my message was unfair or not. It does seem that you take views that are fashionable at least in my neck of the woods. Aren't you at least flattered I thought of you as I was reading Orwell??
 
No one at 21 century wants to be a second class human being, definitely not Palestinians.

> I don't read every message. Did somebody give specific facts about such an
> instance? I do know that there are many anti-Jewish countries in the UN
> who love to beat up on Israel in the General Assembly, so as a general
> rule it's probably good that there's a member state keeping that shit in
> check on the Security Counsel. But that doesn't mean I support every time
> America has vetoed something. I've never looked into it.

I don't want to go into details about appropriate resolutions requiring Israel to stop occupying West Bank and Gaza, seems to me Israeli politicians are engaged here in "creative re-interpretation" of those resolutions. For example, Israeli journalists are paying their discriminate attention to the article "a". They are saying: it says "an occupied territories", not "the occupied territories" in the official text of resolution such and such. Therefore we must give up only on PARTS of West Bank and Gaza, not on the whole thing... In other words, both Israelis and Palestinians are engaged in some equivalent of "political pinball". Palestinians are sure as hell that Oslo agreement presumed that all 1947 war refugees and their descendants would be able to return to any given point in Israel, while Israelis are stating with foam in their mouth that Oslo didn't required no refugees returning within 1967 borders, and moreover they claim Jerusalem must be united and undivided capital of Israel, which would never be accepted by any living Arab or Muslim leader ever, be it late Anwar Sadat or Aby Mazen...

Once I was driving from San Diego to West LA, I left my Hillcrest studio around 9AM, I was driving at the worst traffic time possible, I reached my LA destination in 5 hours, getting my share of traffic jams, inhaling my share of gasoline-polluted air, moving with the speed of 5 mph, the most nightmarish part was a two-hour stretch between Long Beach and LAX exit. Jeez, was I mad! I was ready to tear somebody apart! Now, Oaf, think about Palestinians, who are confined in those infamous temporary camps, their wait is stretching not for hours, but for dozens of years... No surprise, they are raving mad both toward Jews and toward their so-called oil-gulping Arab "brothers", who left them out in the cold, or even worse, used them as pawns to manipulate their frustrations in their own interests.

Why Jews must necessary to engage into war with Palestinians, which is non-winnable by all means? Palestinians are being treated by both Israel and the Arab world as pariahs, therefore they are losing self-respect, therefore they are losing respect to any organized authority, be it Israeli Defence Forces or PLO. If deprived of conventional arms, Palestinians would find their own creative ways to spoil Joe the Israeli Saturday evening, be it by suicide bombers, or by driving a bus into crowd of Jewish elementary school kids, or by killing a 18-year-old Russian Jewish reservist, whose only two desires in life were to get laid first time in his life and to buy an used car, he definitely didn’t mean any harm to Arabs. Terrorism is bad and its wrong, period. Jews, in return, could always retaliate: occupy the whole West Bank, seal it off, create miserable conditions for a million working class Palestinians, starve them to death, blow up buildings, kill Hamas activists and their children and their wifes and also occasionally kill by accident one or two pro-Palestinian “human shields” pacifist Americans like that girl from Seattle as a collateral damage. Jews and Arabs are both Semitic cousins, cousins in quarrel with each other for sure… In result, Israel is always a guilty party in the eyes of world opinion, even if she is indeed engaged in survival struggle. Or better to say in "survival of zionist apartheid struggle". In this situation, some non-standard, non-conventional, even “crazy” thinking is required…

Maybe world Jewry ought to find a way to truly include Palestinians, to truly engage them into modern Israeli society, and the only way to do this is to abandon Zionism, stop encouraging Jewish immigration into Palestine, except in the case of parent-child situation (sorry, Palestine is a small country and already overpopulated, the density of Israel is close to Hong Kong, if one could exclude Negev desert) and be ready to accept Palestinian refugees into Tel Aviv and Jaffa, Haifa and Eilat.

I opine, that Palestine is too small a piece of land to be divided into Jewish and Arab states. This solution, even if implemented by America by force, would mean next Arab-Israeli war at the worst or a temporary ceasefire at best. Palestinians are human, and no human being wants to be a second rate human being in 21 century. One could ignore The Durban Conference in South Africa, where majority of third world nations recognized Zionism as a form of racism, one could boycott it, like USA Republicans did, but what Israelis and their American superiors would do if in 20 years, Arabs would constitute not 20% of Israeli populace, but 51%? To suspend the rule “one person - one vote” and create a Judaic dictatorship? Or to bury Zionist ideology of Israel and create a modern American-like cosmopolitan society?

IMHO, by its core Zionist ideology is obsolete, the only way to create a normal living conditions for both Jews and Arabs is a new state, with ideology which would unite all their citizens, give them common economic and cultural denominator... it may be European-style socialism with human face (a la Sweden) or it could be some new ideology based upon synthesis of Islamic and Judaism-based values, but present situation is a non-starter. It is physically impossible to create two viable states, each of them trying to destroy another one... As I said, Jews are bound to lose a demographic competition to Arabs, as Arafat rightly said: "our main weapon is a womb of our Arab women". Jews in modern world are wielding a tremendous clout of influence, especially here at the United States. Hey, I'm not stating that all this influence is one-sided and Jews are ganged all together... Thanks god, I'm not a subscriber to the antisemitic hysteria like Pat Buchanan... Opposite is true, "Jews" in USA ARE Americans sociologically and culturally, some Jews are leftist radicals, some centrist, some Democratic, some indifferent, some New Conservatives... But it seems to me, that American Jews AND American Fundamentalist pro-Israeli Christians on both left and right are simply avoiding the question of Israeli future altogether... 'cause it is too painful to recognize the truth, and the truth is that Israel in the state she is in right now HAS NO FUTURE, NO PERSPECTIVE at 21 century... Meanwhile Arabs are mismanaging their oil money for many dozen years... Jewish capital's investments into Israel and Arab support of suicide bombers and Hamas could either prolong Zionist-Israeli agony for a dozen more years till inevitable mutual self-defeat for both Zionists and reactionary Islamists, with American or European troops occupying both Israel/Palestine a la Iraq or those investments and political influence could be wisely contributed into creating a revolutionary kind of state, where both Jews and Arabs would be enticed by some new transcendent ideology to live in one state as equals. I don't have remedies, but I'm sure many a dozen Jewish-American and Jewish-European professors, ideologists and economists would at least try to engage their Arab counterparts into informal academic discussion about post-Zionist Israel-Palestine.

And, BTW, with defeat of Saddam Hussein, the world pressure upon America to solve Israeli-Palestinian conflict would tremendously increase.

P.S.
I remember arguing with Oaf about Kurds and Turkey territorial integrity a lot last year...
So yes, Oaf is truly dedicated to the idea of Kurdish independence, so here, Mindy, you indeed missed some of his past messages to me.
 
Re: is 'chompsky' spelled with a "p"?

> Personally, I could give a f*** if you do or you
> don't. I'm an anarchist with no belief system

Anarchism is a belief system in itself. Try again.

> Your blatent anti-semitism makes me ill. Or anti- Israeli sentiment or
> whatever you want to call it. Israel has a right to exist as a soverign
> nation;

Israel actually has no 'right to exist' in my book, but I will pragmatically accept a two state solution. I think Zionism is the contemporary equivalent of apartheid. Tell me why you think a people have a right to their land because their religious texts state as much? On that basis all Americans and Australians ought to cede the land on which we stand back to indigenous communities.

do you know what it feels like to have your life threatened on a
> daily basis? probobly not. Do you know what it feels like to say goodbye
> to your children on a school bus and never see them come home because some
> psycho Islamic fundementalist gets on the bus and blows him or her self
> up? Probobly not..but I lived in Israel and I know what that is like and
> it isn't something to take lightly.

Do you know what it's like to live under curfew, in cities from which you cannot leave, with no functioning economy, with no functioning state of your own, to be subject to and humiliated by occupying forces every time you want to move. To be arbitrarily killed or have your house demolished, your farmland appropriated at whim. To grow up walking down streets with every building riddled with shrapnel holes, to be permanently malnourished, etc, etc. While your nieghbours use arms to protect their right to do just that?

> So f*** off. All of you people make me sick you f***ing pathetic losers!

No, you f*** off, and come back when you have a proper argument.
 
> Hey Alain-- WHAT'S UP?

> YOU ARE A f***ING IDIOT LOSER! GET A f***ING LIFE YOU ANTI-SEMITE MORORN!
> WHY DON'T YOU JUST KILL YOUSELF WITH THE ONE NEURON STILL FIRING IN YOUR
> IDIOTIC BRAIN BEFORE THAT NEURON FLICKERS OUT LIKE ALL OF THE OTHERS. YOU
> ARE ONE SAD SACK!

Hey Sandra, BIG difference between anti-semitic and anti-Israeli beliefs. But I am interested in this technique of single-celled neuronal suicdide you have pioneered, please tell me more...
 
> Frankly I think the right to vetoe should be done away with altogether and
> a simple majority vote should carry the day as in any democratic process

Mmmm. Agree there.

> I agree the US has vetoed everything that would result in any form of
> action against israel including sanctions and that is unfortunate

> Some do demand israel returns to its pre '67 borders but those have no
> teeth per se

There are even some very old resolutions which demand Israel abide by plans for partition of the country formulated in the late 1940s.
 
> Mmmm. Agree there.

Vetoe is crucial, as I've explained in a previous post:
"Since every country gets representation in the UN, and since there are way too
much Arab states (divided arbitrarily by the British) they have more influence than they obviously should have."

> There are even some very old resolutions which demand Israel abide by
> plans for partition of the country formulated in the late 1940s.

Israel was established only in 1948, after the Arabs rejected the plan of
partition offered by the UN in 1947, which talked about two states.
Israel would have liked to abide, but the Arabs started a war, which they
lost. They began a war again 1967 and 1973 and lost again.
After they'll get a state, they'll try again, until they win.
 
Re: No one at 21 century wants to be a second class human being, definitely not Palestinians.

The Palestinian State is already existent. It is called Jordan and the majority of the population there is Palestinian and is much bigger than Israel.

Israel already has 1.5 million Arab citizens, out of an overall 6 million population.
You want to bring in 3 or 4 more into Israel, making it an Arab state,
next to a new Palestinian state.

I am willing to acknowledge a need for a new Palestinian State, but all the 1.5 million Arab citizens in Israel, should be the citizens of this new state and not Israeli citizens.

Otherwise, it is just a matter of time until Israel, is run by the majority of Arabs. There would be two Palestinian states, side by side, next to another Palestinian State, Jordan.

You say the Palestinian are suffering, why aren't they leaving to Jordan?
or any other of the 20+ Arab states.
Because they want to annihilate Israel, they don't want to solve the problem, just like they didn't want to back in 1947, when they were offered a state.

Look at the other Arabs states in the region, you think people there are better off. The only reason Palestinians had work is that Israel employed them. The unemployment rate in Jordan, Egypt, Syria is enormous.

If it's space you need, in which to do nothing (as they always did) they can move to the huge unpopulated areas of Egypt or Saudi Arabia.
But of course these countries don't want to solve the problem.
Gaza strip is so over populated, not because of Israel.
It has a border with Egypt, with huge unpopulated areas next to it.

As I've said in a previous post, if the Germans and Europeans, who care so much for the Palestinians, want to solve the problem, why don't they give a peace of land to the Jewish people in Europe? Where they belong and from which a few survivors were driven away, after surviving the butchering.

Israel could have killed all the Palestinians, which seems to be the right thing to do, like the German did to them and the US did to the Indians.
Who hears their cry now?
 
The Europeans hoped the Arabs would finish the job they've started, i.e. the annihilation of the Jewish people. They keep on hoping and working towards this end.
It's no coincidence the same countries (Germany, France, Belgium) who executed the holocaust, are the ones with the most Anti-Israeli beliefs.

Being Anti-Israeli is quite the same as being Anti-Semitic.
Israel was supposed to be the solution for the Jewish people, in light of the holocaust. Now they try on destroying it as well, for no apparent reason, the same way they initiated the holocaust for no reason.

It seems the world has forgotten the purpose for which Israel was established.
How quickly they forget.

For god's sake, you're talking about 4 million people on a tiny piece of land, and portray it as the world's biggest problem, ignoring common sense and logic.
You should look at the map for a change.
 
hey bore, i'm 90% sure that "sandra" is a friend of a friend of mine. well an ex-friend of a friend. s/he's just trying to be an annoying c***.
 
Re: is 'chompsky' spelled with a "p"?

You know what? You are not a "crushing bore" you are a "f***ing bore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" I have one more thing to say to you:

You and everyone on this message board represent the worst aspects that a capitalist society has to offer. For god's sake, you mix talking about Morrissey (totally inane) with talking about global affairs (something actually important) I assume that in your mind there is no difference--well, you can thank capitalism for that! In your mind, there is no moral, philosophical or ethical problem with that. What year were you born 1990?
Why don't you go out and change the world. March in the streets for what you believe in--whatever! I don't give a f***--but why would you come here in this vapid space of the total imaginary to "chat" about this? The answer to this question--which no one seems to be able to answer--is beyond me. If you can answer that question, then I would actually engage in your pseudo-arguements. But until then goodbye!
 
Now you are refering to Israelies as "Zionists"? You are one sick kid
 
hey, can i have some of whatever you're smoking?

please f*** off sandra/andrew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Message to Andy I Re: Imposters (No Morrissey)
Replies
8
Views
1K
Bluenose
B
W
Message for callas - re: UFO in Manchester (NM)
Replies
0
Views
540
William Boggs
W
S
A Christams Message
Replies
4
Views
1K
Shadowplay
S
R
Message for Librarian On Fire.. (NO Moz)
Replies
4
Views
722
Ruffian
R
R
Threats posted on this message board
Replies
9
Views
2K
Maudlin
M
Back
Top Bottom