Sure, to you that is terrorism. To the palestinians who are being dehumanized, that is freedom fighting.

One man's terrorist is another man's liberator.

I am sure that if the American Revolutionary war was to occur in 2004, the British would be labelling you all "terrorists" too.

It's the best catch word going these days.

Has anyone noticed that Sharon seems to use is 50,000 times a week.

By that logic you'd think Israel would be right at the top of the list.



SLM3

I am a freedom fighter, he is a guerila, they are terrorists.

One of those irregular verbs, isnt it?

Not much oil there, is there?

Lets try 12 years of security council violations. Since 2/3rds of the general assembly of the UN are from dictatorships, I don't really care what they say, nor do they matter.

What a crock of shit. How is killing Israeli civilians working for those "freedom fighters"? I mean sure just piss of Sharon and drive home the fact to the Israeli Hawks that peace isn't an option, bright fucking idea. And no if the American revolution were to occur today we would not be terrorists. Terrorists like those Palestinians cowards (not a shot at all Palestinians, just the ones in context to this thread), KILL CIVILIANS on purpose as a tactic to furthering their agenda. Its a tactic of terror, there is a big difference between that and revolution. And I don't know how many resolutions Israel violates seeing as to the US veteos just about ever one that goes their way.

And Strange Famous comments like
truly shows your ignorance regarding geo-political events /doctrines/relations/ and schemes. For reference we get only 24% of our crude oil from the Persian Gulf area, and 70% of that is from Saudi Arabia.

Then please do not cite Iraq's being in violation of UN resolutions as justification for going to war with Iraq. I mean, we can argue over the war on it's merits, but if the UN is irrelevant to it, then the UN is irrelevant, and if it's not, the Iraq was in second place, behind Israel for being in violation. If it's irrelevant, then why DPRK is not on a military hit list is a valid question.

With all respect, please try for more consistency in your arguments.

Security council >>> general assembly

I thought this was self evident and not worthy of debate.
.

Do you think that the Israelis have never killed any Palestinian civilians??

What about every time they launch a missile attack and end up killing a house full of 5 year olds? Then they get on the news and appologize for it.

Maybe you should read this link to amnesty international.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/2002/israel10012002.html


You just go right ahead listening to what CNN and Ted Turner are telling you.

Mojo, how much oil does America import from Israel?

I agree that its not right what Israel is doing to Palestinian civilians, but given the campaign that is being mounted against them they have no other options. I was merely challenging your rhetoric that was demonizing the Israeli's... 1000 Israeli civilians have been killed in the name of "Palestinian freedom" since 98'.

And as for you strange famous, I don't really get what you are trying to argue. Are you implying that if Israel had oil they would be next on our hit list? Or are you just trying to make a comparison to Iraq on those grounds?

Point taken. I nearly retract my earlier statement. However, of the 15 members of the Security council, 10 are elected by that general assembly you disdain. Granted, these 10 have no veto, but still, without acquiescence of at least 4 of them, the 5 permanent members cannot pass anything.

So, when I said, in effect, "shut up", that was unjust and for that I apologize, but I do believe that the point is still valid.

(<a href="http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter5.htm">UN Charter, Chapter 5</a>. Article 23 is the relevant section.)

Palastines are being pushed off their land, their homes are being demolished, they have no citizenship or country and Isreal keeps pushing. I think the Palastineans are being asses for doing what they are doing and the Isrealies are also being asses, the blame is equal.

I think we are all missing the point of mr. kay's statement. According to the guy with the most credibility there are no wmd's. I wonder where our efforts in this war would be had the admin decided to leave out the wmd portion of its justification for war? Would america have agreed to this act if not for the "imminent threat", which we now know was never real?

There is the "liberate the iraqis" motive, but that's just good p.r.. You can pretend to care about the plight of the iraqi, but i think it more likely that before the "liberate iraq" mantra arose the vast majority of americans didn't give two shits about the iraqi people. I'm willing to bet that, in at most five years, the average american will return to not giving two shits about the iraqi citizen.
IMO two huge justifications for this war are complete and utter nonsense. Just part of the whole consent manufacturing process.

I know what this operation should've been called. Operation: help america sleep better at night. That's what it's about. Teaching the middle east that poppa don't take no mess. Ok, that's fine. Just run that by the american people and see how they feel about it before you act on it. Don't force people to guess about your true intentions. Don't play three card monte with the american people. "Guess which card has the real reason we're going to war"

And people thought willie was slick.