Tribute To 9/11 turns into right vs. left. Enough already!

[Ms_M]

The 911 call was pretty unbelieveable. We must never forget.

[RedWingFan]

How many elected Republicans in New Orleans. They don't even run down there, it's strictly Democratic, which resulted in the poor helpless people waiting for the government for their rides out of the city. Remember the flooded schoolbusses in the parking lot. If liberalism is so great N.O. should have been a Utopia. Instead it's filled with people who've learned to depend on government for all their needs and survival. What did you want Bush to do send in the military and apprehend all the citizens and forcibly remove them. You're an idiot! As everyone here now knows. It was pathetic after Katrina hit Mayor "Schoolbus" Nagen started crying to Bush to send more buses. Even liberal gov't depends on higher gov't to do for them!!!

But then cracks started to show. Prisoners taken from Afghanistan were branded "illegal combatants" rather than POWs and subjected to degrading behaviour. Our country should be ashamed of that still.

Nice comeback on hurricane katrina and President Bush, which you brought up by the way. Or you can just ignore it, the sting of shooting down your ignorant comment will go away!
Wow nice cut & paste job, was it from Moveon.org or some other wack job site? As for this ignorant talking point above. They are branded "illegal combatants" because they aren't in uniform and they hide among civilians, which voids their Geneva Convention protections. Bottom line is they'd kill you just as soon as they'd kill me because we're not radical Muslims. (I know I'm going out on a limb assuming you're not a radical Muslim) But if Bush is soooo wrong and evil you can do your part for the enemy by killing everyone you know and love, then kill yourself. Preferably by decapatation.
Have a nice day. P.S. Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands. But keep enlightening other. Thanks

[Matthew]

.Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands.

Who exactly are "the enemy"? Are you talking about the individuals involved in the planning and finance of the Sep 11 attacks? Or are you talking about the remnants of the Taliban regime...who were Islamic fundamentalists....or the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime...who were not Islamic fundamentalists? Or are you talking about the Iraqi 'insurgents'...who had nothing to do with Sep 11? Or is it Iran perhaps? Syria? Palestine? Just curious...

[frostbite]

But if Bush is soooo wrong and evil you can do your part for the enemy by killing everyone you know and love, then kill yourself. Preferably by decapatation.
Thanks

Your comments are now frankly vile. If you can't form a coherent argument then it's best to say nothing. I think it's puerile and useless to keep this going just because you have no problem with the current US administration and I think it's a disgrace. We've both made our positions clear although you seem to be more concerned with attacking me personally for some reason. In any case, I wasn't coming back on Katrina, I was coming back on your blind patriotism and why I disagree with it. This is a music site. I suggest we get back to talking about music. I would appreciate it if you would keep your aggressive right wing comments away from mine in future and I'll do the same for you.

[RedWingFan]

But if Bush is soooo wrong and evil you can do your part for the enemy by killing everyone you know and love, then kill yourself. Preferably by decapatation.
Thanks

I would appreciate it if you would keep your aggressive right wing comments away from mine in future and I'll do the same for you.

You're wrong it's not just vile. Scramble the letters around and it's evil WE are facing, let me explain this to you since you either can't or just refuse to see it for yourself. My quote from above is not an example of right wing republicans. Right wing republicans are not the ones who want you and your family dead. Do you have the courage to face this fact? If you are then we'll be pretty much on the same side. If not, SOME Republicans will have to drag you kicking and screaming to victory just like they did in the cold war.

[Matthew]

But if Bush is soooo wrong and evil you can do your part for the enemy by killing everyone you know and love, then kill yourself. Preferably by decapatation.
Thanks

I would appreciate it if you would keep your aggressive right wing comments away from mine in future and I'll do the same for you.

You're wrong it's not just vile. Scramble the letters around and it's evil WE are facing, let me explain this to you since you either can't or just refuse to see it for yourself. My quote from above is not an example of right wing republicans. Right wing republicans are not the ones who want you and your family dead. Do you have the courage to face this fact? If you are then we'll be pretty much on the same side. If not, SOME Republicans will have to drag you kicking and screaming to victory just like they did in the cold war.

I'll ask this again.... who exactly are you talking about? Victory against who?

[RedWingFan]

.Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands.

Who exactly are "the enemy"? Are you talking about the individuals involved in the planning and finance of the Sep 11 attacks? Or are you talking about the remnants of the Taliban regime...who were Islamic fundamentalists....or the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime...who were not Islamic fundamentalists? Or are you talking about the Iraqi 'insurgents'...who had nothing to do with Sep 11? Or is it Iran perhaps? Syria? Palestine? Just curious...

Well, you're starting to get it! We are in a war. Call it what you like, a global war on terror or world war 3. We are at war with an idealogy that calls for the death of all infidels (which is you and me) and everyone who is not a radical muslim. So pretty much all the groups you listed. No, it's not going to be easy. It's been going on since the birth of this country and it'll probably be going on for centuries more. The question people need to answer is, "How much longer before we start fighting back?"

[Matthew]

.Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands.

Who exactly are "the enemy"? Are you talking about the individuals involved in the planning and finance of the Sep 11 attacks? Or are you talking about the remnants of the Taliban regime...who were Islamic fundamentalists....or the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime...who were not Islamic fundamentalists? Or are you talking about the Iraqi 'insurgents'...who had nothing to do with Sep 11? Or is it Iran perhaps? Syria? Palestine? Just curious...

Well, you're starting to get it! We are in a war. Call it what you like, a global war on terror or world war 3. We are at war with an idealogy that calls for the death of all infidels (which is you and me) and everyone who is not a radical muslim. So pretty much all the groups you listed. No, it's not going to be easy. It's been going on since the birth of this country and it'll probably be going on for centuries more. The question people need to answer is, "How much longer before we start fighting back?"

A terrorist cell of twenty men attacked the World Trade Centre and killed nearly 3,000 people. So far the "War on Terror" has led to the deaths of 72,000 people - of which at least 95% are innocent civilians. And you ask: how much longer before America starts fighting back?

You name the "ideology" of Islamic fundamentalist terror groups as the enemy. Yet the USA attacked Iraq which (unlike Saudi Arabia, a hardline Islamic state which the USA is happy to do business with) had a secular government. Say what you like about Saddam Hussein...but he wasn't a radical Muslim.

Come on...we all know that America has no interest or hope of stamping out terrorism. How can they? There is more terrorism in the Middle East as a direct result of America's interventions in the region since 2001 than there was before. Did Britain and Spain beat down the ideology? No, of course not...the "War of Terror" provoked the London and Madrid bombings...

The "War on Terror" is just a device to incite patriotrism and paranoia and a strong sense of victimhood in the populace...and to provide a moral framework for the USA's economic ambitions in the region. Surely you can see that?

You say that "it has been going on since the birth of our country"....what has? The American mainland being attacked? Other than the WTC and Pearl Harbour (which led to nuclear strikes against two entire cities in Japan) I can't think of a single attack.

Believe me...I'm not anti-American or left-wing or anything like that....and I'm all for striking back at the organisers and financiers of the Sep 11 attacks. But this talk of "World War 3" against the entire Middle East - regardless of whether or not an individual country has attacked America - sounds pretty "radical" and terrifying to me.

[RedWingFan]

.Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands.

Who exactly are "the enemy"? Are you talking about the individuals involved in the planning and finance of the Sep 11 attacks? Or are you talking about the remnants of the Taliban regime...who were Islamic fundamentalists....or the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime...who were not Islamic fundamentalists? Or are you talking about the Iraqi 'insurgents'...who had nothing to do with Sep 11? Or is it Iran perhaps? Syria? Palestine? Just curious...

Well, you're starting to get it! We are in a war. Call it what you like, a global war on terror or world war 3. We are at war with an idealogy that calls for the death of all infidels (which is you and me) and everyone who is not a radical muslim. So pretty much all the groups you listed. No, it's not going to be easy. It's been going on since the birth of this country and it'll probably be going on for centuries more. The question people need to answer is, "How much longer before we start fighting back?"

A terrorist cell of twenty men attacked the World Trade Centre and killed nearly 3,000 people. So far the "War on Terror" has led to the deaths of 72,000 people - of which at least 95% are innocent civilians. And you ask: how much longer before America starts fighting back?

You name the "ideology" of Islamic fundamentalist terror groups as the enemy. Yet the USA attacked Iraq which (unlike Saudi Arabia, a hardline Islamic state which the USA is happy to do business with) had a secular government. Say what you like about Saddam Hussein...but he wasn't a radical Muslim.

Come on...we all know that America has no interest or hope of stamping out terrorism. How can they? There is more terrorism in the Middle East as a direct result of America's interventions in the region since 2001 than there was before. Did Britain and Spain beat down the ideology? No, of course not...the "War of Terror" provoked the London and Madrid bombings...

The "War on Terror" is just a device to incite patriotrism and paranoia and a strong sense of victimhood in the populace...and to provide a moral framework for the USA's economic ambitions in the region. Surely you can see that?

You say that "it has been going on since the birth of our country"....what has? The American mainland being attacked? Other than the WTC and Pearl Harbour (which led to nuclear strikes against two entire cities in Japan) I can't think of a single attack.

Believe me...I'm not anti-American or left-wing or anything like that.....

Your not Anti american or left wing. Yeah right! you just ran through all the appeasing lefts talking points except you left out that Bush just wants all the Middle Eastern oil. What I mean by being under attack by radical muslims is that they've always had that idealogy and now in the nuclear age, we can not afford to sit by with someone with your pacifist attitude running the country.

In the book ''Victory in Tripoli,'' Joshua London writes about the Muslim Barbary pirates. They attacked American shipping vessels in the 18th century, often boarding ships and enslaving crewmembers. Thomas Jefferson, then U.S. ambassador to France, and John Adams, then ambassador to Britain, visited the resident ambassador from Tripoli (modern-day Libya) in London to negotiate a treaty to protect American ships from Barbary pirates. Why, asked Adams and Jefferson, is your government so hostile to the fledgling United States of America? After all, we have no quarrel with you, nor you with us.

The Tripolitan ambassador told them – as reported to the Continental Congress – ''that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."

Yes, they are that ''sadistic.'' And yes, we are ''really in for a long and awful war.''

The above in bold is from an excellent Larry Elder column

If "they" do manage to detonate a nuclear or dirty bomb here. Would that be enough for you to fight back. Your separating these groups into who we have a right to attack and those we don't would make this an impossible fight. They all have one thing in common they want us dead. They don't wear uniforms to distinguish themselves. THEY are responsible for civilian casualties because they hide among civilians! How many innocent civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If we hadn't dropped those bombs, we would have had to invade mainland Japan. The deathtoll on both sides would have been staggering. While the deaths of civilian Japanese was tragic, it ended a long brutal war.
The only way to start a change there is by providing freedom for the people. The dictators there feed hate to their kids, our only hope is to plant the seed of democracy and freedom. Sadaam Hussein was in violation how many U.N. resolutions? He violated his agreement w/ us from the '91 Gulf War. He threw out weapons inspectors. The U.S. had the best case against him. Save the "what about the W.M.D's" argument. We had to go by our and the rest of the worlds intelligence because he threw out the inspector. I'll differ from you in that I don't want to wait to be hit w/ a nuke before fighting back

[TRAGChick]

October 4, 2001 ~ WTC cross is blessed by Father Jordan.


October 4th is my birthday.

A celebration of life, when thousands died...

How are you supposed to REACT to something like that?!

[RedWingFan]

Great post of the pic Trag, I hadn't seen that one. Thanks

[TRAGChick]

Great post of the pic Trag, I hadn't seen that one. Thanks

You're welcome.

Cribbed from: www.september11news.com

September 13, 2001 ~ Steel cross found in WTC ruins.


Subsequent to the NY Post story below, we located a photograph of one of the original crosses
found on the top of the rubble (image above). It is the same cross used in the October 4th
memorial ceremony with the New York City Fire Department. The cross of steel beams
was blessed at Ground Zero on the northwestern side of the World Trade Center
attack site. The cross was found by a laborer at the site two days after the twin towers'
collapsed and later moved to its present location. Father Brian Jordan blessed the cross. The
cross was from World Trade Tower One, and was found in World Trade Building Six, and
then moved to the October 4, 2001 location. (Click on the photographs for larger images.)
______________________________________________________________________________

On September 23, 2001, The New York Post Published the Following Story:
© NY Post

You are looking at what some people believe is a miracle.

Two days after the disaster, a construction worker found several perfectly formed crosses planted upright in a
pit in the rubble of the heavily damaged 6 World Trade Center.

The large, cross-shaped metal beams just happened to fall that way when one of the towers collapsed. An FBI
chaplain who has spent days at ground zero says he has not seen anything like it on the vast site.

As word of the find has spread at ground zero, exhausted and emotionally overwhelmed rescue workers have
been flocking to the site to pray and meditate.

"People have a very emotional reaction when they see it," says the Rev. Carl Bassett, an FBI chaplain. "They
are amazed to see something like that in all the disarray. There's no symmetry to anything down there, except
those crosses."

Chaplain Ray Giunta of Sacramento, Calif., has been to the crosses to pray with rescue workers.

"One of the firefighters pointed to them last night and told me, ‘There's my angel,'" Giunta said.

The angel protecting the pit where the crosses were found is the Brooklyn-born hardhat who found them: a
gentle giant named Frank Silecchia.

Silecchia, 47, who now lives in Little Ferry, N.J., found the crosses on the Thursday morning immediately
following the collapse of the towers. He marked the site by spray-painting on a nearby wall the words
"God's House," and a directional arrow.

"The crosses are just shards of steel that came from the Tower 1 [the north tower], and went right through
the roof of Building 6 and destroyed the entire center of it," he explained.

"When I first saw it, it took my heart, and made me cry for about 20 minutes," he says. "It helped me heal
the burden of my despair, and gave me closure on the whole catastrophe."

In subsequent days, Silecchia, a born-again Christian, led his fellow rescue workers and others - many of
whom were grieving the loss of loved ones - to the crosses.

A veteran firefighter who had been digging through the twisted metal for his lost firefighter son. An angry
cop who lost someone in the collapse. A Vatican representative, who photographed the crosses for the
pope. And ABC's Barbara Walters.

He says they all left in peace.

"Barbara Walters' niece lost her son in the building," he said. "Barbara told me she wanted people to see
the House of God, so people who needed healing could find it."

[Matthew]

.Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands.

Who exactly are "the enemy"? Are you talking about the individuals involved in the planning and finance of the Sep 11 attacks? Or are you talking about the remnants of the Taliban regime...who were Islamic fundamentalists....or the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime...who were not Islamic fundamentalists? Or are you talking about the Iraqi 'insurgents'...who had nothing to do with Sep 11? Or is it Iran perhaps? Syria? Palestine? Just curious...

Well, you're starting to get it! We are in a war. Call it what you like, a global war on terror or world war 3. We are at war with an idealogy that calls for the death of all infidels (which is you and me) and everyone who is not a radical muslim. So pretty much all the groups you listed. No, it's not going to be easy. It's been going on since the birth of this country and it'll probably be going on for centuries more. The question people need to answer is, "How much longer before we start fighting back?"

A terrorist cell of twenty men attacked the World Trade Centre and killed nearly 3,000 people. So far the "War on Terror" has led to the deaths of 72,000 people - of which at least 95% are innocent civilians. And you ask: how much longer before America starts fighting back?

You name the "ideology" of Islamic fundamentalist terror groups as the enemy. Yet the USA attacked Iraq which (unlike Saudi Arabia, a hardline Islamic state which the USA is happy to do business with) had a secular government. Say what you like about Saddam Hussein...but he wasn't a radical Muslim.

Come on...we all know that America has no interest or hope of stamping out terrorism. How can they? There is more terrorism in the Middle East as a direct result of America's interventions in the region since 2001 than there was before. Did Britain and Spain beat down the ideology? No, of course not...the "War of Terror" provoked the London and Madrid bombings...

The "War on Terror" is just a device to incite patriotrism and paranoia and a strong sense of victimhood in the populace...and to provide a moral framework for the USA's economic ambitions in the region. Surely you can see that?

You say that "it has been going on since the birth of our country"....what has? The American mainland being attacked? Other than the WTC and Pearl Harbour (which led to nuclear strikes against two entire cities in Japan) I can't think of a single attack.

Believe me...I'm not anti-American or left-wing or anything like that.....

Your not Anti american or left wing. Yeah right! you just ran through all the appeasing lefts talking points except you left out that Bush just wants all the Middle Eastern oil. What I mean by being under attack by radical muslims is that they've always had that idealogy and now in the nuclear age, we can not afford to sit by with someone with your pacifist attitude running the country.

In the book ''Victory in Tripoli,'' Joshua London writes about the Muslim Barbary pirates. They attacked American shipping vessels in the 18th century, often boarding ships and enslaving crewmembers. Thomas Jefferson, then U.S. ambassador to France, and John Adams, then ambassador to Britain, visited the resident ambassador from Tripoli (modern-day Libya) in London to negotiate a treaty to protect American ships from Barbary pirates. Why, asked Adams and Jefferson, is your government so hostile to the fledgling United States of America? After all, we have no quarrel with you, nor you with us.

The Tripolitan ambassador told them – as reported to the Continental Congress – ''that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."

Yes, they are that ''sadistic.'' And yes, we are ''really in for a long and awful war.''

The above in bold is from an excellent Larry Elder column

If "they" do manage to detonate a nuclear or dirty bomb here. Would that be enough for you to fight back. Your separating these groups into who we have a right to attack and those we don't would make this an impossible fight. They all have one thing in common they want us dead. They don't wear uniforms to distinguish themselves. THEY are responsible for civilian casualties because they hide among civilians! How many innocent civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If we hadn't dropped those bombs, we would have had to invade mainland Japan. The deathtoll on both sides would have been staggering. While the deaths of civilian Japanese was tragic, it ended a long brutal war.
The only way to start a change there is by providing freedom for the people. The dictators there feed hate to their kids, our only hope is to plant the seed of democracy and freedom. Sadaam Hussein was in violation how many U.N. resolutions? He violated his agreement w/ us from the '91 Gulf War. He threw out weapons inspectors. The U.S. had the best case against him. Save the "what about the W.M.D's" argument. We had to go by our and the rest of the worlds intelligence because he threw out the inspector. I'll differ from you in that I don't want to wait to be hit w/ a nuke before fighting back

Raider Fan - you're as quick to judge me as you are the entire Muslim world. I am not anti-American or a pacifist. Like most people around the world, I supported the attack on Afghanistan and the methods the USA used to topple the Taliban regime - "surgical strikes", minimum civilian causualties and so on. The Taliban were brazenly sheilding key members of Al Queada - and the US response here seemed entirely necessary and justified to me.

Also - my country is fighting alongside yours. I'm against our presence in Iraq and believe that it provoked the terrorist attacks in London last year - but this doesn't make me anti-British.

The foreign policy of the Bush administration in the Middle East has increased the threat of terrorism...it has created a fierce resentment in the general poulation and a sharp increase in extremism in the region which will be felt for generations to come. So I'm all for trying to eradicate the 'terrorist threat' but I disagree with the strategy since 2003.

As for the Tripolitan ambassador and the pirates...

What's your point here? That there has always been religiious hatred and intolerance? That Islamic extremists have always hated Christianity? Or that the pirates threatened America's national security?

The Koran itself says:

"Even if you stretch out your hand against me to kill me, I shall not stretch out my hand against you to kill you."

"'If anyone murders an [innocent] person, it will be as if he has murdered the whole of humanity. And if anyone saves a person it will be as if he has saved the whole of humanity.' "

Sure, we can find quotes which contradict these peaceful sentiments too - but equally we can do this with the Bible.

The invasion of Iraq suggested - to me anyway - that the USA WASN'T serious about "fighting terrorism". The Hussein regime wasn't involved in supporting Islamic fundamentalist terror groups and it had a weak military (unlike in the 1980s when the USA supplied them with billions of dollars of hardware). But it had enormous oil reserves. It was a soft and lucrative target.

Meanwhile...Iran is an Islamic state...it supports and arms terrorist groups such as Hezbollah...and it has a nuclear programme. But the USA decided to attack Iraq instead...and Iran now has far more influence in the affairs of its neighbour than it did before.

If the USA was serious about terrorism then it would try to resolve some of the major issues in the region which cause terrorism. The USA could - for example - put pressure on Israel to stop terrorizing the people of Gaza and the Lebanon. It could actively and agressively fight for the creation of a Palestinian state.

Has the right-wing, hawkish policies of Israel prevented terrorist attacks? No, of course not. It has instead radicalised the region...so much so that both Hamas and Hezbollah now play an active role in the governments of its immediate neighbours. And so the violence and terror continues...

So...I don't want to wait until we get hit by a nuke or a dirty bomb or an airline jet either. But my point is that the current strategy in the Middle East isn't diminishing the threat of terrorism in the slightest.

[RedWingFan]

.Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands.

Who exactly are "the enemy"? Are you talking about the individuals involved in the planning and finance of the Sep 11 attacks? Or are you talking about the remnants of the Taliban regime...who were Islamic fundamentalists....or the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime...who were not Islamic fundamentalists? Or are you talking about the Iraqi 'insurgents'...who had nothing to do with Sep 11? Or is it Iran perhaps? Syria? Palestine? Just curious...

Well, you're starting to get it! We are in a war. Call it what you like, a global war on terror or world war 3. We are at war with an idealogy that calls for the death of all infidels (which is you and me) and everyone who is not a radical muslim. So pretty much all the groups you listed. No, it's not going to be easy. It's been going on since the birth of this country and it'll probably be going on for centuries more. The question people need to answer is, "How much longer before we start fighting back?"

A terrorist cell of twenty men attacked the World Trade Centre and killed nearly 3,000 people. So far the "War on Terror" has led to the deaths of 72,000 people - of which at least 95% are innocent civilians. And you ask: how much longer before America starts fighting back?

You name the "ideology" of Islamic fundamentalist terror groups as the enemy. Yet the USA attacked Iraq which (unlike Saudi Arabia, a hardline Islamic state which the USA is happy to do business with) had a secular government. Say what you like about Saddam Hussein...but he wasn't a radical Muslim.

Come on...we all know that America has no interest or hope of stamping out terrorism. How can they? There is more terrorism in the Middle East as a direct result of America's interventions in the region since 2001 than there was before. Did Britain and Spain beat down the ideology? No, of course not...the "War of Terror" provoked the London and Madrid bombings...

The "War on Terror" is just a device to incite patriotrism and paranoia and a strong sense of victimhood in the populace...and to provide a moral framework for the USA's economic ambitions in the region. Surely you can see that?

You say that "it has been going on since the birth of our country"....what has? The American mainland being attacked? Other than the WTC and Pearl Harbour (which led to nuclear strikes against two entire cities in Japan) I can't think of a single attack.

Believe me...I'm not anti-American or left-wing or anything like that.....

Your not Anti american or left wing. Yeah right! you just ran through all the appeasing lefts talking points except you left out that Bush just wants all the Middle Eastern oil. What I mean by being under attack by radical muslims is that they've always had that idealogy and now in the nuclear age, we can not afford to sit by with someone with your pacifist attitude running the country.

In the book ''Victory in Tripoli,'' Joshua London writes about the Muslim Barbary pirates. They attacked American shipping vessels in the 18th century, often boarding ships and enslaving crewmembers. Thomas Jefferson, then U.S. ambassador to France, and John Adams, then ambassador to Britain, visited the resident ambassador from Tripoli (modern-day Libya) in London to negotiate a treaty to protect American ships from Barbary pirates. Why, asked Adams and Jefferson, is your government so hostile to the fledgling United States of America? After all, we have no quarrel with you, nor you with us.

The Tripolitan ambassador told them – as reported to the Continental Congress – ''that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."

Yes, they are that ''sadistic.'' And yes, we are ''really in for a long and awful war.''

The above in bold is from an excellent Larry Elder column

If "they" do manage to detonate a nuclear or dirty bomb here. Would that be enough for you to fight back. Your separating these groups into who we have a right to attack and those we don't would make this an impossible fight. They all have one thing in common they want us dead. They don't wear uniforms to distinguish themselves. THEY are responsible for civilian casualties because they hide among civilians! How many innocent civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If we hadn't dropped those bombs, we would have had to invade mainland Japan. The deathtoll on both sides would have been staggering. While the deaths of civilian Japanese was tragic, it ended a long brutal war.
The only way to start a change there is by providing freedom for the people. The dictators there feed hate to their kids, our only hope is to plant the seed of democracy and freedom. Sadaam Hussein was in violation how many U.N. resolutions? He violated his agreement w/ us from the '91 Gulf War. He threw out weapons inspectors. The U.S. had the best case against him. Save the "what about the W.M.D's" argument. We had to go by our and the rest of the worlds intelligence because he threw out the inspector. I'll differ from you in that I don't want to wait to be hit w/ a nuke before fighting back

Even if you stretch out your hand against me to kill me, I shall not stretch out my hand against you to kill you."

"'If anyone murders an [innocent] person, it will be as if he has murdered the whole of humanity. And if anyone saves a person it will be as if he has saved the whole of humanity.' "

Don't tell me this, go tell the terrorists! They will promptly order you to convert or cut your head off. Or don't you agree that that would happen, you need to face reality.Good luck with the diplomacy! Answer this question, how do you negotiate with someone who only wants you dead? Where's the starting point?

If the USA was serious about terrorism then it would try to resolve some of the major issues in the region which cause terrorism. The USA could - for example - put pressure on Israel to stop terrorizing the people of Gaza and the Lebanon. It could actively and agressively fight for the creation of a Palestinian state.

Like I said above we've bent over backwards to satisfy the Palestinians with LAND FOR PEACE. The Jews have surrendered land and they are the ones being attacked still.
Shortly after Israel was created by the holy United Nations, Israel was immediately attacked. And as you say Israel had to "terrorize" the people by fighting back. There will be no peace in that conflict until there is a victor. It certainly won't come through a cease fire. If I hate you for some reason and get a big stick and crack you over the head w/ it, leading to a fight. If you start getting the better of me, I start shouting "ceasefire" and a third party demands we break it up. You start going about your business again, and I go looking for a bigger stick. That's exactly what's going on there, over and over again. The Israelis aren't terrorizing anyone, they're trying to live their lives. There are plenty of Muslims peacefully living in Israel! Answer this question. How many Jews are live peacefully among the Palestinians? NONE! In this case you are also 180' out of phase.
If this doesn't convince you than you clearly have some kind of problem which would give me a better chance of talking sense to a brick wall.

[AR]

My balls itch and I'm drunk.

[RedWingFan]

.Keep siding w/ the enemy before the elections I already know where the Democratic party stands.

Who exactly are "the enemy"? Are you talking about the individuals involved in the planning and finance of the Sep 11 attacks? Or are you talking about the remnants of the Taliban regime...who were Islamic fundamentalists....or the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime...who were not Islamic fundamentalists? Or are you talking about the Iraqi 'insurgents'...who had nothing to do with Sep 11? Or is it Iran perhaps? Syria? Palestine? Just curious...

Well, you're starting to get it! We are in a war. Call it what you like, a global war on terror or world war 3. We are at war with an idealogy that calls for the death of all infidels (which is you and me) and everyone who is not a radical muslim. So pretty much all the groups you listed. No, it's not going to be easy. It's been going on since the birth of this country and it'll probably be going on for centuries more. The question people need to answer is, "How much longer before we start fighting back?"

A terrorist cell of twenty men attacked the World Trade Centre and killed nearly 3,000 people. So far the "War on Terror" has led to the deaths of 72,000 people - of which at least 95% are innocent civilians. And you ask: how much longer before America starts fighting back?

You name the "ideology" of Islamic fundamentalist terror groups as the enemy. Yet the USA attacked Iraq which (unlike Saudi Arabia, a hardline Islamic state which the USA is happy to do business with) had a secular government. Say what you like about Saddam Hussein...but he wasn't a radical Muslim.

Come on...we all know that America has no interest or hope of stamping out terrorism. How can they? There is more terrorism in the Middle East as a direct result of America's interventions in the region since 2001 than there was before. Did Britain and Spain beat down the ideology? No, of course not...the "War of Terror" provoked the London and Madrid bombings...

The "War on Terror" is just a device to incite patriotrism and paranoia and a strong sense of victimhood in the populace...and to provide a moral framework for the USA's economic ambitions in the region. Surely you can see that?

You say that "it has been going on since the birth of our country"....what has? The American mainland being attacked? Other than the WTC and Pearl Harbour (which led to nuclear strikes against two entire cities in Japan) I can't think of a single attack.

Believe me...I'm not anti-American or left-wing or anything like that.....

Your not Anti american or left wing. Yeah right! you just ran through all the appeasing lefts talking points except you left out that Bush just wants all the Middle Eastern oil. What I mean by being under attack by radical muslims is that they've always had that idealogy and now in the nuclear age, we can not afford to sit by with someone with your pacifist attitude running the country.

In the book ''Victory in Tripoli,'' Joshua London writes about the Muslim Barbary pirates. They attacked American shipping vessels in the 18th century, often boarding ships and enslaving crewmembers. Thomas Jefferson, then U.S. ambassador to France, and John Adams, then ambassador to Britain, visited the resident ambassador from Tripoli (modern-day Libya) in London to negotiate a treaty to protect American ships from Barbary pirates. Why, asked Adams and Jefferson, is your government so hostile to the fledgling United States of America? After all, we have no quarrel with you, nor you with us.

The Tripolitan ambassador told them – as reported to the Continental Congress – ''that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."

Yes, they are that ''sadistic.'' And yes, we are ''really in for a long and awful war.''

The above in bold is from an excellent Larry Elder column

If "they" do manage to detonate a nuclear or dirty bomb here. Would that be enough for you to fight back. Your separating these groups into who we have a right to attack and those we don't would make this an impossible fight. They all have one thing in common they want us dead. They don't wear uniforms to distinguish themselves. THEY are responsible for civilian casualties because they hide among civilians! How many innocent civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If we hadn't dropped those bombs, we would have had to invade mainland Japan. The deathtoll on both sides would have been staggering. While the deaths of civilian Japanese was tragic, it ended a long brutal war.
The only way to start a change there is by providing freedom for the people. The dictators there feed hate to their kids, our only hope is to plant the seed of democracy and freedom. Sadaam Hussein was in violation how many U.N. resolutions? He violated his agreement w/ us from the '91 Gulf War. He threw out weapons inspectors. The U.S. had the best case against him. Save the "what about the W.M.D's" argument. We had to go by our and the rest of the worlds intelligence because he threw out the inspector. I'll differ from you in that I don't want to wait to be hit w/ a nuke before fighting back

Even if you stretch out your hand against me to kill me, I shall not stretch out my hand against you to kill you."

"'If anyone murders an [innocent] person, it will be as if he has murdered the whole of humanity. And if anyone saves a person it will be as if he has saved the whole of humanity.' "

Don't tell me this, go tell the terrorists! They will promptly order you to convert or cut your head off. Or don't you agree that that would happen, you need to face reality.Good luck with the diplomacy! Answer this question, how do you negotiate with someone who only wants you dead? Where's the starting point?

If the USA was serious about terrorism then it would try to resolve some of the major issues in the region which cause terrorism. The USA could - for example - put pressure on Israel to stop terrorizing the people of Gaza and the Lebanon. It could actively and agressively fight for the creation of a Palestinian state.

Like I said above we've bent over backwards to satisfy the Palestinians with LAND FOR PEACE. Yasser Arrafat practically had his own room in the Clinton White House. He was the most frequent foreign "leader" in history. It accomplished nothing. The Jews have surrendered land and they are the ones being attacked still.
Shortly after Israel was created by the holy United Nations, Israel was immediately attacked. And as you say Israel had to "terrorize" the people by fighting back. There will be no peace in that conflict until there is a victor. It certainly won't come through a cease fire. If I hate you for some reason and get a big stick and crack you over the head w/ it, leading to a fight. If you start getting the better of me, I start shouting "ceasefire" and a third party demands we break it up. You start going about your business again, and I go looking for a bigger stick. That's exactly what's going on there, over and over again. The Israelis aren't terrorizing anyone, they're trying to live their lives. There are plenty of Muslims peacefully living in Israel! Answer this question. How many Jews are live peacefully among the Palestinians? NONE! In this case you are also 180' out of phase.
If this doesn't convince you than you clearly have some kind of problem which would give me a better chance of talking sense to a brick wall.

[Matthew]

Firstly, I'm not suggesting using "diplomacy" at all times. As I said, I supported the use of military force in Afghanistan. My point is that the US and Britain are - by invading Iraq, exploiting the region for oil, offering unconditional backing to Israel - are radicalizing the region.

By all means go after the specific terrorist cells that pose a threat to the American mainland. Protect your borders...use the CIA more effectively...do whatever it takes to shut down Al-Quaeda's operations.

But so far 72,000 people in the Middle East have died in the "War on Terror" yet only ONE PERSON has been charged in the US with a crime in connection with 9/11.

Can't you see why there is a perception in the Middle East that America is on a crusade against Islam...that it is the enemy of the Arab people...that it wants to plunder the region's natural resources? Until this perception is changed, new terrorist cells will rapidly spring up all over the world - which is exactly what is happening. The London suicide bombers, for example, were making direct "retribution" for the occupation of Iraq.

Yet your argument is that we should ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come. The posts you've written so far here seem entirely in keeping with most right-wing American Republicans - the fear and hatred toward the Arab world, the total bias toward Israel, the angry, simplistic solutions to the terrorist problem and the vested interest in there being chaos in the Middle East.

Okay...on to Israel...

You made this extraordinary statement:

"The Israelis aren't terrorizing anyone, they're trying to live their lives."

Have you read what's going on in Gaza at the moment?

Published on Friday, September 8, 2006 by the Independent / UK

'Gaza is a jail. Nobody is allowed to leave. We are all starving now' by Patrick Cockburn


A whole society is being destroyed. There are 1.5 million Palestinians imprisoned in the most heavily populated area in the world. Israel has stopped all trade. It has even forbidden fishermen to go far from the shore so they wade into the surf to try vainly to catch fish with hand-thrown nets.

Many people are being killed by Israeli incursions that occur every day by land and air. A total of 262 people have been killed and 1,200 wounded, of whom 60 had arms or legs amputated, since 25 June, says Dr Juma al-Saqa, the director of the al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City which is fast running out of medicine. Of these, 64 were children and 26 women. This bloody conflict in Gaza has so far received only a fraction of the attention given by the international media to the war in Lebanon.

It was on 25 June that the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was taken captive and two other soldiers were killed by Palestinian militants who used a tunnel to get out of the Gaza Strip. In the aftermath of this, writes Gideon Levy in the daily Haaretz, the Israeli army "has been rampaging through Gaza - there's no other word to describe it - killing and demolishing, bombing and shelling, indiscriminately". Gaza has essentially been reoccupied since Israeli troops and tanks come and go at will. In the northern district of Shajhayeh they took over several houses last week and stayed five days. By the time they withdrew, 22 Palestinians had been killed, three houses were destroyed and groves of olive, citrus and almond trees had been bulldozed.

Fuad al-Tuba, the 61-year-old farmer who owned a farm here, said: "They even destroyed 22 of my bee-hives and killed four sheep." He pointed sadly to a field, its brown sandy earth churned up by tracks of bulldozers, where the stumps of trees and broken branches with wilting leaves lay in heaps. Near by a yellow car was standing on its nose in the middle of a heap of concrete blocks that had once been a small house.

His son Baher al-Tuba described how for five days Israeli soldiers confined him and his relatives to one room in his house where they survived by drinking water from a fish pond. "Snipers took up positions in the windows and shot at anybody who came near," he said. "They killed one of my neighbours called Fathi Abu Gumbuz who was 56 years old and just went out to get water."

Sometimes the Israeli army gives a warning before a house is destroyed. The sound that Palestinians most dread is an unknown voice on their cell phone saying they have half an hour to leave their home before it is hit by bombs or missiles. There is no appeal.

But it is not the Israeli incursions alone that are destroying Gaza and its people. In the understated prose of a World Bank report published last month, the West Bank and Gaza face "a year of unprecedented economic recession. Real incomes may contract by at least a third in 2006 and poverty to affect close to two thirds of the population." Poverty in this case means a per capita income of under $2 (£1.06) a day.

There are signs of desperation everywhere. Crime is increasing. People do anything to feed their families. Israeli troops entered the Gaza industrial zone to search for tunnels and kicked out the Palestinian police. When the Israelis withdrew they were replaced not by the police but by looters. On one day this week there were three donkey carts removing twisted scrap metal from the remains of factories that once employed thousands.

"It is the worst year for us since 1948 [when Palestinian refugees first poured into Gaza]," says Dr Maged Abu-Ramadan, a former ophthalmologist who is mayor of Gaza City. "Gaza is a jail. Neither people nor goods are allowed to leave it. People are already starving. They try to live on bread and falafel and a few tomatoes and cucumbers they grow themselves."

The few ways that Gazans had of making money have disappeared. Dr Abu-Ramadan says the Israelis "have destroyed 70 per cent of our orange groves in order to create security zones." Carnations and strawberries, two of Gaza's main exports, were thrown away or left to rot. An Israeli air strike destroyed the electric power station so 55 per cent of power was lost. Electricity supply is now becoming almost as intermittent as in Baghdad.

The Israeli assault over the past two months struck a society already hit by the withdrawal of EU subsidies after the election of Hamas as the Palestinian government in March. Israel is withholding taxes owed on goods entering Gaza. Under US pressure, Arab banks abroad will not transfer funds to the government.

Two thirds of people are unemployed and the remaining third who mostly work for the state are not being paid. Gaza is now by far the poorest region on the Mediterranean. Per capita annual income is $700, compared with $20,000 in Israel. Conditions are much worse than in Lebanon where Hizbollah liberally compensates war victims for loss of their houses.

The Israeli siege and the European boycott are a collective punishment of everybody in Gaza. The gunmen are unlikely to be deterred. In a bed in Shifa Hospital was a sturdy young man called Ala Hejairi with wounds to his neck, legs, chest and stomach. "I was laying an anti-tank mine last week in Shajhayeh when I was hit by fire from an Israeli drone," he said. "I will return to the resistance when I am better. Why should I worry? If I die I will die a martyr and go to paradise."

His father, Adel, said he was proud of what his son had done adding that three of his nephews were already martyrs. He supported the Hamas government: "Arab and Western countries want to destroy this government because it is the government of the resistance."

As the economy collapses there will be many more young men in Gaza willing to take Ala Hejairi's place. Untrained and ill-armed most will be killed. But the destruction of Gaza, now under way, will ensure that no peace is possible in the Middle East for generations to come.


The deadly toll

* After the kidnap of Cpl Gilad Shalit by Palestinians on 25 June, Israel launched a massive offensive and blockade of Gaza under the operation name Summer Rains.

* The Gaza Strip's 1.3 million inhabitants, 33 per cent of whom live in refugee camps, have been under attack for 74 days.

* More than 260 Palestinians, including 64 children and 26 women, have been killed since 25 June. One in five is a child. One Israeli soldier has been killed and 26 have been wounded.

* 1,200 Palestinians have been injured, including up to 60 amputations. A third of victims brought to hospital are children.

* Israeli warplanes have launched more than 250 raids on Gaza, hitting the two power stations and the foreign and Information ministries.

* At least 120 Palestinian structures including houses, workshops and greenhouses have been destroyed and 160 damaged by the Israelis.

* The UN has criticised Israel's bombing, which has caused an estimated $1.8bn in damage to the electricity grid and leaving more than a million people without regular access to drinking water.

* The Israeli human rights group B'Tselem says 76 Palestinians, including 19 children, were killed by Israeli forces in August alone. Evidence shows at least 53 per cent were not participating in hostilities.

* In the latest outbreak of violence, three Palestinians were killed yesterday when Israeli troops raided a West Bank town in search of a wanted militant. Two of those killed were unarmed, according to witnesses.


So is Israel's response here an effective solution to terrorism in the region? The Palestinan paramilitaries attacked a military target...but Israeli is terrorizing an entire society. It clearly has no interest whatsoever in creating peace and stability. It - like the US - actively wants terrorism so it can justify the most important objective. In Israel's case it is to deny the Palestinians a state of their own. In America's it is to secure and exploit the Middle East's oil reserves.

Could this be any more obvious?

[RedWingFan]

Yet your argument is that we should ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come. The posts you've written so far here seem entirely in keeping with most right-wing American Republicans - the fear and hatred toward the Arab world

No I don't want to "ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come" that was the point with hypothetical getting a bigger stick to bash you over the head story. Are you too dense to process that, or is there another reason why you don't side with free and democratic states? I don't know any clearer way to spell it out for you. They need to be allowed to fight it out until there is a clear victor.

It was on 25 June that the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was taken captive and two other soldiers were killed by Palestinian militants who used a tunnel to get out of the Gaza Strip.

What's this? Isn't this what set off the most recent conflict? An Israeli soldier who I'm sure was brutally guardian the Israeli border, victimizing the poor Palestinian militants/terrorists. I don't have anything against muslims, just like the jews don't have a problem with muslims because they have them living peacefully in Israel. Remember I pointed that out in my last post that you ignored. Also that Jews are not welcome in the palestinian areas. If Jews have the hatred for Muslims wouldn't they start by slaughtering the ones living among them? You're whole premise is rediculous you brick wall.
And don't start weeping and crying to me about "innocent palestinians" being killed while terrorists are hiding among them. I don't hear you or any other appeaser crying about Palestinian's strapped with explosives walking into pizzarias and other crowded public places, intentionally murdering innocent kids. You obviously have no problem w/ innocent jews getting killed intentionally, which means I'm probably wasting my time w/ you. See ya brick wall!

[ballbag]

I think this is probably a good time for you to say goodbye Raiderfan. I've been reading all these posts over the last few days and I think you've succeeded in alienating yourself from at least half of the people who use this board.

Your comments have been blinkered, biased and ill-informed and you have met reasoned discussion from the likes of Matthew and frostbite with sensationalist comments and right wing rhetoric. Your views on the Israel/Palestine issue are so off the scale it's actually laughable. Like I say, I think this is a good point for you to bow out. Why not stick to talking about Journey, which, let's face it is what we're here for.

Speaking of which, Soto ROCKS and he's the best thing to happen to Journey in years.

[RedWingFan]

I think this is probably a good time for you to say goodbye Raiderfan. I've been reading all these posts over the last few days and I think you've succeeded in alienating yourself from at least half of the people who use this board.

Your comments have been blinkered, biased and ill-informed and you have met reasoned discussion from the likes of Matthew and frostbite with sensationalist comments and right wing rhetoric. Your views on the Israel/Palestine issue are so off the scale it's actually laughable. Like I say, I think this is a good point for you to bow out. Why not stick to talking about Journey, which, let's face it is what we're here for.

Speaking of which, Soto ROCKS and he's the best thing to happen to Journey in years.

ok, so crying about innocent civilians being killed during fighting terrorists living among them is BAD. But strapping bombs to people and intentionally killing folks in public places is acceptable?
You can kiss my ass, I'll stay here as long as I damn well please. If you don't like it you can leave.

[ballbag]

Hey man. I like reading your posts. You make me laugh. It's like a mini-bush or something. I don't know what news channel of "facts" you're choosing to believe but it makes for entertaining reading. You've come across as such a moron in the course of this that I'm enjoying watching you dig that hole deeper and deeper. Even in America, views like yours are uncommon. The rest of the world cannot understand such a standpoint and it's just hilarious. Keep talking I dare ya.

[RedWingFan]

Hey man. I like reading your posts. You make me laugh. It's like a mini-bush or something. I don't know what news channel of "facts" you're choosing to believe but it makes for entertaining reading. You've come across as such a moron in the course of this that I'm enjoying watching you dig that hole deeper and deeper. Even in America, views like yours are uncommon. The rest of the world cannot understand such a standpoint and it's just hilarious. Keep talking I dare ya.

ok, so crying about innocent civilians being killed during fighting terrorists living among them is BAD. But strapping bombs to people and intentionally killing folks in public places is acceptable?

So you have no problem with this? I believe most of the people on this board do have a problem with this. ConversationPC, and Saint John are 2 I can think of off hand. And what's this "Keep talking I dare ya" ? Who the hell are you ballface

[ballbag]

That's it. Keep going. That hole's getting waaaaay deeper. You just can't help yourself can you. How about trying to keep quiet when you don't have any facts to back up your nonsense. Facts have been thrown at you and you come back with the same old crap. You're getting tired man. Funny, but tired. You are quick to put anyone who disagrees with you down but can't take it your self. Who am I? I'm here to give a bully a taste of his own medicine. Like it?

[ballbag]

Hurry up. I'm waiting for your witty response.

[ballbag]

Cat got your tongue. Good!

[ballbag]

Go on. Post one last time so we can all see what a Grade A Jerk off you really are. Have some respect for people who know what they're talking about in future ro I'll be back. I left BT to get away from misguided "patriots" like you.

[ballbag]

Oh hang on. I got it. You're one of the hippos.

[Matthew]

Yet your argument is that we should ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come. The posts you've written so far here seem entirely in keeping with most right-wing American Republicans - the fear and hatred toward the Arab world

No I don't want to "ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come" that was the point with hypothetical getting a bigger stick to bash you over the head story. Are you too dense to process that, or is there another reason why you don't side with free and democratic states? I don't know any clearer way to spell it out for you. They need to be allowed to fight it out until there is a clear victor.

It was on 25 June that the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was taken captive and two other soldiers were killed by Palestinian militants who used a tunnel to get out of the Gaza Strip.

What's this? Isn't this what set off the most recent conflict? An Israeli soldier who I'm sure was brutally guardian the Israeli border, victimizing the poor Palestinian militants/terrorists. I don't have anything against muslims, just like the jews don't have a problem with muslims because they have them living peacefully in Israel. Remember I pointed that out in my last post that you ignored. Also that Jews are not welcome in the palestinian areas. If Jews have the hatred for Muslims wouldn't they start by slaughtering the ones living among them? You're whole premise is rediculous you brick wall.
And don't start weeping and crying to me about "innocent palestinians" being killed while terrorists are hiding among them. I don't hear you or any other appeaser crying about Palestinian's strapped with explosives walking into pizzarias and other crowded public places, intentionally murdering innocent kids. You obviously have no problem w/ innocent jews getting killed intentionally, which means I'm probably wasting my time w/ you. See ya brick wall!

I'm totally against any Palestinian attacking Israeli civilians. The example I gave was an attack on a military target.

You say "don't start weeping and crying" about innocent Palestinians - and yet America expects the world's sympathy and support about the innocent Americans who died in 9/11.

America has received that sympathy and understanding - except from the fanatics.

And the Palestinians have received sympathy and understanding too - except from the fanatics. Such as yourself.

It's always difficult to argue with right wing Republicans because they are too angry and bitter to think in a rational way. Maybe you'll talk some sense when you calm down a bit.

[RedWingFan]

Yet your argument is that we should ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come. The posts you've written so far here seem entirely in keeping with most right-wing American Republicans - the fear and hatred toward the Arab world

No I don't want to "ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come" that was the point with hypothetical getting a bigger stick to bash you over the head story. Are you too dense to process that, or is there another reason why you don't side with free and democratic states? I don't know any clearer way to spell it out for you. They need to be allowed to fight it out until there is a clear victor.

It was on 25 June that the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was taken captive and two other soldiers were killed by Palestinian militants who used a tunnel to get out of the Gaza Strip.

What's this? Isn't this what set off the most recent conflict? An Israeli soldier who I'm sure was brutally guardian the Israeli border, victimizing the poor Palestinian militants/terrorists. I don't have anything against muslims, just like the jews don't have a problem with muslims because they have them living peacefully in Israel. Remember I pointed that out in my last post that you ignored. Also that Jews are not welcome in the palestinian areas. If Jews have the hatred for Muslims wouldn't they start by slaughtering the ones living among them? You're whole premise is rediculous you brick wall.
And don't start weeping and crying to me about "innocent palestinians" being killed while terrorists are hiding among them. I don't hear you or any other appeaser crying about Palestinian's strapped with explosives walking into pizzarias and other crowded public places, intentionally murdering innocent kids. You obviously have no problem w/ innocent jews getting killed intentionally, which means I'm probably wasting my time w/ you. See ya brick wall!

I'm totally against any Palestinian attacking Israeli civilians. The example I gave was an attack on a military target.

You say "don't start weeping and crying" about innocent Palestinians - and yet America expects the world's sympathy and support about the innocent Americans who died in 9/11.

America has received that sympathy and understanding - except from the fanatics.

And the Palestinians have received sympathy and understanding too - except from the fanatics. Such as yourself.

It's always difficult to argue with right wing Republicans because they are too angry and bitter to think in a rational way. Maybe you'll talk some sense when you calm down a bit.

I didn't say I don't sympathize with Palestinians. I'm sure there are some who would love to have peace and freedom. The only way that they'll ever get it is if the terrorists or militants are dealt with. I feel sorry for those who have no choice but to live in a constant war zone. They're being held hostage by these radicals, these innocent people have been getting killed for how many centuries. What chance do any kind of moderate viewpoints have there, in that kind of brutal environment?

[Matthew]

Yet your argument is that we should ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come. The posts you've written so far here seem entirely in keeping with most right-wing American Republicans - the fear and hatred toward the Arab world

No I don't want to "ensure that the cycle of attack and counter-attack escalates for generations to come" that was the point with hypothetical getting a bigger stick to bash you over the head story. Are you too dense to process that, or is there another reason why you don't side with free and democratic states? I don't know any clearer way to spell it out for you. They need to be allowed to fight it out until there is a clear victor.

It was on 25 June that the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was taken captive and two other soldiers were killed by Palestinian militants who used a tunnel to get out of the Gaza Strip.

What's this? Isn't this what set off the most recent conflict? An Israeli soldier who I'm sure was brutally guardian the Israeli border, victimizing the poor Palestinian militants/terrorists. I don't have anything against muslims, just like the jews don't have a problem with muslims because they have them living peacefully in Israel. Remember I pointed that out in my last post that you ignored. Also that Jews are not welcome in the palestinian areas. If Jews have the hatred for Muslims wouldn't they start by slaughtering the ones living among them? You're whole premise is rediculous you brick wall.
And don't start weeping and crying to me about "innocent palestinians" being killed while terrorists are hiding among them. I don't hear you or any other appeaser crying about Palestinian's strapped with explosives walking into pizzarias and other crowded public places, intentionally murdering innocent kids. You obviously have no problem w/ innocent jews getting killed intentionally, which means I'm probably wasting my time w/ you. See ya brick wall!

I'm totally against any Palestinian attacking Israeli civilians. The example I gave was an attack on a military target.

You say "don't start weeping and crying" about innocent Palestinians - and yet America expects the world's sympathy and support about the innocent Americans who died in 9/11.

America has received that sympathy and understanding - except from the fanatics.

And the Palestinians have received sympathy and understanding too - except from the fanatics. Such as yourself.

It's always difficult to argue with right wing Republicans because they are too angry and bitter to think in a rational way. Maybe you'll talk some sense when you calm down a bit.

I didn't say I don't sympathize with Palestinians. I'm sure there are some who would love to have peace and freedom. The only way that they'll ever get it is if the terrorists or militants are dealt with. I feel sorry for those who have no choice but to live in a constant war zone. They're being held hostage by these radicals, these innocent people have been getting killed for how many centuries. What chance do any kind of moderate viewpoints have there, in that kind of brutal environment?

RaiderFan - is it an extreme viewpoint to believe that Palestinians have the right to their own State?

Yes - there will also be Palestinian extremists who believe that Israel doesn't have the right to exist. And there will also be Zionists who believe in the 'Greater Israel' which would swallow up what little land the Palestinians stil have left.

Both of these viewpoints are extreme - and look what it has achieved. Hatred and mistrust that will last for decades...possibly forever.

The moderate view - surely - is to recognise the existence of both an Israeli State and a Palestinian State. No, this won't eradicate terrorism entirely - nothing can - but it will certainly shift power away from the fanatics and toward the moderate Palestinians.

The more the Palestinian civilians are terrorized by the Israeli military...the more power and land is taken away from them...the more they are humiliated... whilst the international community allows this to happen...the more desperate and alienated the Palestinians become. And this desperation makes it so much easier for terrorist organisations to recruit new members.

In Britain at the moment our government - for all its flaws - are trying to develop a relationship with the moderate Muslim community here. The purpose? The more co-operation and respect there is...the more intelligence we receive about the extremist elements within that community. This is a far more effective way of zeroing in on the terrorists than bombing the crap out of the entire community.

My point is that you can't fight extremism with extremism. Military strength isn't enough any more. We have to be smarter and more cunning now.

I'm sure that the Bush administration knows this. And this makes me wonder....do America and Israel actually want to 'stop' terrorism? Or does terrorism actually allow them enormous freedom to pursue other agendas?