Mickey "Suicide Bomber" Mouse

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Narmer
9/11? Seeing all the lives that have been lost because of our backing of corrupt, undemocratic governments over the decades, the answer is an obvious yes.

Yeah: Osama, Al-Qaeda, and Jihadis worldwide have made strides in improving the life of arabs and muslims worldwide -- just take a look at Iraq, Thailand, and Africa.

Also, they are making inroads in Europe.... "UK You Will Pay" anyone?

 

[imported_dna]

For your Enjoyment

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: dna
For your Enjoyment

Got a laugh out of that. thanks.








Though it is not a laughing matter.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Narmer
9/11? Seeing all the lives that have been lost because of our backing of corrupt, undemocratic governments over the decades, the answer is an obvious yes.

Yeah: Osama, Al-Qaeda, and Jihadis worldwide have made strides in improving the life of arabs and muslims worldwide -- just take a look at Iraq, Thailand, and Africa.

Also, they are making inroads in Europe.... "UK You Will Pay" anyone?

Ummm, I don't think their aim is to make the lives of arabs better just like our military's aim isn't to make the lives of Americans better. Their aim is purely vengeance. As a Jew, I know it's something you can understand. Eye for an eye, anyone?

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Ummm, I don't think their aim is to make the lives of arabs better just like our military's aim isn't to make the lives of Americans better. Their aim is purely vengeance. As a Jew, I know it's something you can understand. Eye for an eye, anyone?

"As a Jew" -- :laugh:

The "eye for an eye" concept exists everywhere and probably predates any organized religion.

It's too bad you're touched in the head and don't realize that you're rationalizing terrorism for the sake of terrorism. But -- as others have said -- keep digging.

Also, perhaps your attitude would've slightly changed if someone you knew died on 9/11 or was blown to bits on a bus/subway. Nevertheless, you keep on promoting the Arab mentality of "it's everyone's fault" that enables dictators and wackos like Nassrallah.

EDIT
Again, Here's Iyad Jamal Al-Din with much more insight than you:

We do not hold ourselves accountable. This is why America came to demand that the Arabs be accountable. We must have more self-confidence and be accountable before others hold us accountable. we must discipline ourselves before the Americans and English discipline us. We must maintain human rights, which we have neglected for 1,300 or 1,400 years, to this day - until the arrival of the Americans, the Christians, the English, the Zionists, or the Crusaders - call them what you will. They came to teach you, the followers of Muhammad, how to respect human rights.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Narmer
Ummm, I don't think their aim is to make the lives of arabs better just like our military's aim isn't to make the lives of Americans better. Their aim is purely vengeance. As a Jew, I know it's something you can understand. Eye for an eye, anyone?

"As a Jew" -- :laugh:

The "eye for an eye" concept exists everywhere and probably predates any organized religion.

It's too bad you're touched in the head and don't realize that you're rationalizing terrorism for the sake of terrorism. But -- as others have said -- keep digging.

Also, perhaps your attitude would've slightly changed if someone you knew died on 9/11 or was blown to bits on a bus/subway. Nevertheless, you keep on promoting the Arab mentality of "it's everyone's fault" that enables dictators and wackos like Nassrallah.

EDIT
Again, Here's Iyad Jamal Al-Din with much more insight than you:

We do not hold ourselves accountable. This is why America came to demand that the Arabs be accountable. We must have more self-confidence and be accountable before others hold us accountable. we must discipline ourselves before the Americans and English discipline us. We must maintain human rights, which we have neglected for 1,300 or 1,400 years, to this day - until the arrival of the Americans, the Christians, the English, the Zionists, or the Crusaders - call them what you will. They came to teach you, the followers of Muhammad, how to respect human rights.

I knew some people from the WTC that died. After that attack happened, many people were so confused, I was wondering why they were so confused. For me, it was a sense of anger and understanding at the same time. Life isn't fair, but I don't try to simplify it simply for the sake of patriotism.

You can deflect that phrase from Judaism but it came right from your own people's bible. I called you out on it and now you're trying to say, well, everybody does it. Be a man and own up to it.

Finally, if you were somewhat intelligent, you would see that I'm not rationalizing terrorism for the sake of it. This is a logical exercise that people need to endeavour in. Trying to simplify the complicated as a battle between good and evil is dumb. If you see a problem, the worst thing you can do is instinctively pick a side. IMHO, the best response is to try to understand the root causes of such problems and deal with it via reason.

EDIT: I read that quote you posted after I posted the wordings above. It's all nice and honourable but you seem to forget that Al Qaeda is not a government, they are a force of vengeance. They are a culmination of the anger of all the modern foreign influence on muslim land, at least according to them. So, while there may be some people that will do what that guy is saying, the job of Al Qaeda is death and destruction. Why? BECAUSE IT IS A MILITANT ORGANIZATION.

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Narmer
Ummm, I don't think their aim is to make the lives of arabs better just like our military's aim isn't to make the lives of Americans better. Their aim is purely vengeance. As a Jew, I know it's something you can understand. Eye for an eye, anyone?

"As a Jew" -- :laugh:

The "eye for an eye" concept exists everywhere and probably predates any organized religion.

It's too bad you're touched in the head and don't realize that you're rationalizing terrorism for the sake of terrorism. But -- as others have said -- keep digging.

Also, perhaps your attitude would've slightly changed if someone you knew died on 9/11 or was blown to bits on a bus/subway. Nevertheless, you keep on promoting the Arab mentality of "it's everyone's fault" that enables dictators and wackos like Nassrallah.

EDIT
Again, Here's Iyad Jamal Al-Din with much more insight than you:

We do not hold ourselves accountable. This is why America came to demand that the Arabs be accountable. We must have more self-confidence and be accountable before others hold us accountable. we must discipline ourselves before the Americans and English discipline us. We must maintain human rights, which we have neglected for 1,300 or 1,400 years, to this day - until the arrival of the Americans, the Christians, the English, the Zionists, or the Crusaders - call them what you will. They came to teach you, the followers of Muhammad, how to respect human rights.

I knew some people from the WTC that died. After that attack happened, many people were so confused, I was wondering why they were so confused. For me, it was a sense of anger and understanding at the same time. Life isn't fair, but I don't try to simplify it simply for the sake of patriotism.

You can deflect that phrase from Judaism but it came right from your own people's bible. I called you out on it and now you're trying to say, well, everybody does it. Be a man and own up to it.

Finally, if you were somewhat intelligent, you would see that I'm not rationalizing terrorism for the sake of it. This is a logical exercise that people need to endeavour in. Trying to simplify the complicated as a battle between good and evil is dumb. If you see a problem, the worst thing you can do is instinctively pick a side. IMHO, the best response is to try to understand the root causes of such problems and deal with it via reason.

EDIT: I read that quote you posted after I posted the wordings above. It's all nice and honourable but you seem to forget that Al Qaeda is not a government, they are a force of vengeance. They are a culmination of the anger of all the modern foreign influence on muslim land, at least according to them. So, while there may be some people that will do what that guy is saying, the job of Al Qaeda is death and destruction. Why? BECAUSE IT IS A MILITANT ORGANIZATION.

Narmer, grow up.
The fact is you can not fight fanatical, suicidal organizations by understanding where they are coming from. These people have no respect for human life, look at what they are doing to their own people in Iraq. Blowing up markets, killing thousands of innocent civilians a month because some of them are Sunni Muslims, because some of them want to better their lives by joining the police force, some of them were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time.
You will never be able to justify those acts. Its kind of like African Americans in this country taking all the blame for crime, when in reality they are mostly killing each other. The same can be said of these people you support. Yes every once in a while they will kill a few Americans, or once every generation they will pull off a 9/11. But for the most part their own people suffer, at the hands of the terrorists or at the hands of their authoritarian, brutal regimes that THEY support.
You seem like a kid that has a quest for knowledge and understanding, but you can not understand the minds of criminal elements that would kill you in a heartbeat if given the chance. ANSWER THIS PLEASE- When the Israelis and Palestinians were on the CUSP of a final agreement, when Rabin's death invigorated the Israeli peace movement, the terrorists responded by bombing bus after bus, killing hundreds of innocent civilians because they knew it was the only way to prevent Peres from becoming the PM. A couple of years later the Israelis and Palestinians were negotiating a final status agreement that was literally minutes away from being ratified. And during that time 19 young men were training to be pilots without the ability to land. Now you tell me, what course of action could anyone take in the face of that type of hatred? Stop listening to your liberal idiotic apologist professors and peers and look at the real issues Narmer.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Narmer
Ummm, I don't think their aim is to make the lives of arabs better just like our military's aim isn't to make the lives of Americans better. Their aim is purely vengeance. As a Jew, I know it's something you can understand. Eye for an eye, anyone?

"As a Jew" -- :laugh:

The "eye for an eye" concept exists everywhere and probably predates any organized religion.

It's too bad you're touched in the head and don't realize that you're rationalizing terrorism for the sake of terrorism. But -- as others have said -- keep digging.

Also, perhaps your attitude would've slightly changed if someone you knew died on 9/11 or was blown to bits on a bus/subway. Nevertheless, you keep on promoting the Arab mentality of "it's everyone's fault" that enables dictators and wackos like Nassrallah.

EDIT
Again, Here's Iyad Jamal Al-Din with much more insight than you:

We do not hold ourselves accountable. This is why America came to demand that the Arabs be accountable. We must have more self-confidence and be accountable before others hold us accountable. we must discipline ourselves before the Americans and English discipline us. We must maintain human rights, which we have neglected for 1,300 or 1,400 years, to this day - until the arrival of the Americans, the Christians, the English, the Zionists, or the Crusaders - call them what you will. They came to teach you, the followers of Muhammad, how to respect human rights.

I knew some people from the WTC that died. After that attack happened, many people were so confused, I was wondering why they were so confused. For me, it was a sense of anger and understanding at the same time. Life isn't fair, but I don't try to simplify it simply for the sake of patriotism.

You can deflect that phrase from Judaism but it came right from your own people's bible. I called you out on it and now you're trying to say, well, everybody does it. Be a man and own up to it.

Finally, if you were somewhat intelligent, you would see that I'm not rationalizing terrorism for the sake of it. This is a logical exercise that people need to endeavour in. Trying to simplify the complicated as a battle between good and evil is dumb. If you see a problem, the worst thing you can do is instinctively pick a side. IMHO, the best response is to try to understand the root causes of such problems and deal with it via reason.

EDIT: I read that quote you posted after I posted the wordings above. It's all nice and honourable but you seem to forget that Al Qaeda is not a government, they are a force of vengeance. They are a culmination of the anger of all the modern foreign influence on muslim land, at least according to them. So, while there may be some people that will do what that guy is saying, the job of Al Qaeda is death and destruction. Why? BECAUSE IT IS A MILITANT ORGANIZATION.

Narmer, grow up.
The fact is you can not fight fanatical, suicidal organizations by understanding where they are coming from. These people have no respect for human life, look at what they are doing to their own people in Iraq. Blowing up markets, killing thousands of innocent civilians a month because some of them are Sunni Muslims, because some of them want to better their lives by joining the police force, some of them were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time.
You will never be able to justify those acts. Its kind of like African Americans in this country taking all the blame for crime, when in reality they are mostly killing each other. The same can be said of these people you support. Yes every once in a while they will kill a few Americans, or once every generation they will pull off a 9/11. But for the most part their own people suffer, at the hands of the terrorists or at the hands of their authoritarian, brutal regimes that THEY support.
You seem like a kid that has a quest for knowledge and understanding, but you can not understand the minds of criminal elements that would kill you in a heartbeat if given the chance. ANSWER THIS PLEASE- When the Israelis and Palestinians were on the CUSP of a final agreement, when Rabin's death invigorated the Israeli peace movement, the terrorists responded by bombing bus after bus, killing hundreds of innocent civilians because they knew it was the only way to prevent Peres from becoming the PM. A couple of years later the Israelis and Palestinians were negotiating a final status agreement that was literally minutes away from being ratified. And during that time 19 young men were training to be pilots without the ability to land. Now you tell me, what course of action could anyone take in the face of that type of hatred? Stop listening to your liberal idiotic apologist professors and peers and look at the real issues Narmer.

It's funny that you mention the operations but don't want to discuss how they started. Why should I discuss what's in the heart of men at a particular instance when I don't know, neither do you. What I can discuss is the reason behind the creation of such groups and the makeup of such groups. Many of the men in these militant organizations are not pawns. Some of the bombers are lawyers, engineers, sons of aristocrats, and other elites from society. As for the organizations themselves, Hamas was initially supported by Israel to be a challenger to the PLO. Al Qaeda, well, we know their history. The problem is that these groups take a long view and are extremists. That means that they represent a particular part of society- that which lusts for vengeance.

You also mention peace agreements and such, but their attacks did not occur in a vacuum. As you should know, there are elements within Israeli society attacks and kills Palestinians without being taken to task. There are also politicos that use attacks to bring down governments to keep the hostility going so that there is no peace agreement. Finally, there are those on the Palestinian side that were as corrupt as sin and cared mainly for their own self-interests. Again, these topics are quite complicated and interlocked. If you want me to believe that all these people are blood-thirsty animals that seek political violence as an end in and of itself, then you are sadly mistaken because that is not the case.

If you read my posts here, you will see that I am far from being some tree-hugging liberal apologist that will defend all that terror does. What I'm trying to get you to understand is that we are not the "good" guys just as they are not the "bad" guys. Our government does things for its own self-interest and then hides behind the flag (or civilians) when people get pissed. Stop barking at one group while protecting another and try to understand the root causes of these problems.

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Narmer
Ummm, I don't think their aim is to make the lives of arabs better just like our military's aim isn't to make the lives of Americans better. Their aim is purely vengeance. As a Jew, I know it's something you can understand. Eye for an eye, anyone?

"As a Jew" -- :laugh:

The "eye for an eye" concept exists everywhere and probably predates any organized religion.

It's too bad you're touched in the head and don't realize that you're rationalizing terrorism for the sake of terrorism. But -- as others have said -- keep digging.

Also, perhaps your attitude would've slightly changed if someone you knew died on 9/11 or was blown to bits on a bus/subway. Nevertheless, you keep on promoting the Arab mentality of "it's everyone's fault" that enables dictators and wackos like Nassrallah.

EDIT
Again, Here's Iyad Jamal Al-Din with much more insight than you:

We do not hold ourselves accountable. This is why America came to demand that the Arabs be accountable. We must have more self-confidence and be accountable before others hold us accountable. we must discipline ourselves before the Americans and English discipline us. We must maintain human rights, which we have neglected for 1,300 or 1,400 years, to this day - until the arrival of the Americans, the Christians, the English, the Zionists, or the Crusaders - call them what you will. They came to teach you, the followers of Muhammad, how to respect human rights.

I knew some people from the WTC that died. After that attack happened, many people were so confused, I was wondering why they were so confused. For me, it was a sense of anger and understanding at the same time. Life isn't fair, but I don't try to simplify it simply for the sake of patriotism.

You can deflect that phrase from Judaism but it came right from your own people's bible. I called you out on it and now you're trying to say, well, everybody does it. Be a man and own up to it.

Finally, if you were somewhat intelligent, you would see that I'm not rationalizing terrorism for the sake of it. This is a logical exercise that people need to endeavour in. Trying to simplify the complicated as a battle between good and evil is dumb. If you see a problem, the worst thing you can do is instinctively pick a side. IMHO, the best response is to try to understand the root causes of such problems and deal with it via reason.

EDIT: I read that quote you posted after I posted the wordings above. It's all nice and honourable but you seem to forget that Al Qaeda is not a government, they are a force of vengeance. They are a culmination of the anger of all the modern foreign influence on muslim land, at least according to them. So, while there may be some people that will do what that guy is saying, the job of Al Qaeda is death and destruction. Why? BECAUSE IT IS A MILITANT ORGANIZATION.

Narmer, grow up.
The fact is you can not fight fanatical, suicidal organizations by understanding where they are coming from. These people have no respect for human life, look at what they are doing to their own people in Iraq. Blowing up markets, killing thousands of innocent civilians a month because some of them are Sunni Muslims, because some of them want to better their lives by joining the police force, some of them were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time.
You will never be able to justify those acts. Its kind of like African Americans in this country taking all the blame for crime, when in reality they are mostly killing each other. The same can be said of these people you support. Yes every once in a while they will kill a few Americans, or once every generation they will pull off a 9/11. But for the most part their own people suffer, at the hands of the terrorists or at the hands of their authoritarian, brutal regimes that THEY support.
You seem like a kid that has a quest for knowledge and understanding, but you can not understand the minds of criminal elements that would kill you in a heartbeat if given the chance. ANSWER THIS PLEASE- When the Israelis and Palestinians were on the CUSP of a final agreement, when Rabin's death invigorated the Israeli peace movement, the terrorists responded by bombing bus after bus, killing hundreds of innocent civilians because they knew it was the only way to prevent Peres from becoming the PM. A couple of years later the Israelis and Palestinians were negotiating a final status agreement that was literally minutes away from being ratified. And during that time 19 young men were training to be pilots without the ability to land. Now you tell me, what course of action could anyone take in the face of that type of hatred? Stop listening to your liberal idiotic apologist professors and peers and look at the real issues Narmer.

It's funny that you mention the operations but don't want to discuss how they started. Why should I discuss what's in the heart of men at a particular instance when I don't know, neither do you. What I can discuss is the reason behind the creation of such groups and the makeup of such groups. Many of the men in these militant organizations are not pawns. Some of the bombers are lawyers, engineers, sons of aristocrats, and other elites from society. As for the organizations themselves, Hamas was initially supported by Israel to be a challenger to the PLO. Al Qaeda, well, we know their history. The problem is that these groups take a long view and are extremists. That means that they represent a particular part of society- that which lusts for vengeance.

You also mention peace agreements and such, but their attacks did not occur in a vacuum. As you should know, there are elements within Israeli society attacks and kills Palestinians without being taken to task. There are also politicos that use attacks to bring down governments to keep the hostility going so that there is no peace agreement. Finally, there are those on the Palestinian side that were as corrupt as sin and cared mainly for their own self-interests. Again, these topics are quite complicated and interlocked. If you want me to believe that all these people are blood-thirsty animals that seek political violence as an end in and of itself, then you are sadly mistaken because that is not the case.

If you read my posts here, you will see that I am far from being some tree-hugging liberal apologist that will defend all that terror does. What I'm trying to get you to understand is that we are not the "good" guys just as they are not the "bad" guys. Our government does things for its own self-interest and then hides behind the flag (or civilians) when people get pissed. Stop barking at one group while protecting another and try to understand the root causes of these problems.

Where did I state that I wanted you to believe that "all these people are blood-thirsty animals? "
I never stated that. The terror organizations, that only serve their own twisted political/religous beliefs are the ones that need to be eliminated. They target civilians intentionally and they feed off destruction to grow, and to destabilize any form of progress. These groups, whether they reside in Palestine, India, Somalia or even America, need to understand that their actions are not justified and their followers need to be dealt with like the vermin that they are. Ultimately, they are the one primarily responsible for their own peoples suffering, on a magnitude much greater than their supposed enemies (which in a sick way are the only reason why the exist).

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Narmer
Ummm, I don't think their aim is to make the lives of arabs better just like our military's aim isn't to make the lives of Americans better. Their aim is purely vengeance. As a Jew, I know it's something you can understand. Eye for an eye, anyone?

"As a Jew" -- :laugh:

The "eye for an eye" concept exists everywhere and probably predates any organized religion.

It's too bad you're touched in the head and don't realize that you're rationalizing terrorism for the sake of terrorism. But -- as others have said -- keep digging.

Also, perhaps your attitude would've slightly changed if someone you knew died on 9/11 or was blown to bits on a bus/subway. Nevertheless, you keep on promoting the Arab mentality of "it's everyone's fault" that enables dictators and wackos like Nassrallah.

EDIT
Again, Here's Iyad Jamal Al-Din with much more insight than you:

We do not hold ourselves accountable. This is why America came to demand that the Arabs be accountable. We must have more self-confidence and be accountable before others hold us accountable. we must discipline ourselves before the Americans and English discipline us. We must maintain human rights, which we have neglected for 1,300 or 1,400 years, to this day - until the arrival of the Americans, the Christians, the English, the Zionists, or the Crusaders - call them what you will. They came to teach you, the followers of Muhammad, how to respect human rights.

I knew some people from the WTC that died. After that attack happened, many people were so confused, I was wondering why they were so confused. For me, it was a sense of anger and understanding at the same time. Life isn't fair, but I don't try to simplify it simply for the sake of patriotism.

You can deflect that phrase from Judaism but it came right from your own people's bible. I called you out on it and now you're trying to say, well, everybody does it. Be a man and own up to it.

Finally, if you were somewhat intelligent, you would see that I'm not rationalizing terrorism for the sake of it. This is a logical exercise that people need to endeavour in. Trying to simplify the complicated as a battle between good and evil is dumb. If you see a problem, the worst thing you can do is instinctively pick a side. IMHO, the best response is to try to understand the root causes of such problems and deal with it via reason.

EDIT: I read that quote you posted after I posted the wordings above. It's all nice and honourable but you seem to forget that Al Qaeda is not a government, they are a force of vengeance. They are a culmination of the anger of all the modern foreign influence on muslim land, at least according to them. So, while there may be some people that will do what that guy is saying, the job of Al Qaeda is death and destruction. Why? BECAUSE IT IS A MILITANT ORGANIZATION.

Narmer, grow up.
The fact is you can not fight fanatical, suicidal organizations by understanding where they are coming from. These people have no respect for human life, look at what they are doing to their own people in Iraq. Blowing up markets, killing thousands of innocent civilians a month because some of them are Sunni Muslims, because some of them want to better their lives by joining the police force, some of them were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time.
You will never be able to justify those acts. Its kind of like African Americans in this country taking all the blame for crime, when in reality they are mostly killing each other. The same can be said of these people you support. Yes every once in a while they will kill a few Americans, or once every generation they will pull off a 9/11. But for the most part their own people suffer, at the hands of the terrorists or at the hands of their authoritarian, brutal regimes that THEY support.
You seem like a kid that has a quest for knowledge and understanding, but you can not understand the minds of criminal elements that would kill you in a heartbeat if given the chance. ANSWER THIS PLEASE- When the Israelis and Palestinians were on the CUSP of a final agreement, when Rabin's death invigorated the Israeli peace movement, the terrorists responded by bombing bus after bus, killing hundreds of innocent civilians because they knew it was the only way to prevent Peres from becoming the PM. A couple of years later the Israelis and Palestinians were negotiating a final status agreement that was literally minutes away from being ratified. And during that time 19 young men were training to be pilots without the ability to land. Now you tell me, what course of action could anyone take in the face of that type of hatred? Stop listening to your liberal idiotic apologist professors and peers and look at the real issues Narmer.

It's funny that you mention the operations but don't want to discuss how they started. Why should I discuss what's in the heart of men at a particular instance when I don't know, neither do you. What I can discuss is the reason behind the creation of such groups and the makeup of such groups. Many of the men in these militant organizations are not pawns. Some of the bombers are lawyers, engineers, sons of aristocrats, and other elites from society. As for the organizations themselves, Hamas was initially supported by Israel to be a challenger to the PLO. Al Qaeda, well, we know their history. The problem is that these groups take a long view and are extremists. That means that they represent a particular part of society- that which lusts for vengeance.

You also mention peace agreements and such, but their attacks did not occur in a vacuum. As you should know, there are elements within Israeli society attacks and kills Palestinians without being taken to task. There are also politicos that use attacks to bring down governments to keep the hostility going so that there is no peace agreement. Finally, there are those on the Palestinian side that were as corrupt as sin and cared mainly for their own self-interests. Again, these topics are quite complicated and interlocked. If you want me to believe that all these people are blood-thirsty animals that seek political violence as an end in and of itself, then you are sadly mistaken because that is not the case.

If you read my posts here, you will see that I am far from being some tree-hugging liberal apologist that will defend all that terror does. What I'm trying to get you to understand is that we are not the "good" guys just as they are not the "bad" guys. Our government does things for its own self-interest and then hides behind the flag (or civilians) when people get pissed. Stop barking at one group while protecting another and try to understand the root causes of these problems.

Where did I state that I wanted you to believe that "all these people are blood-thirsty animals? "
I never stated that. The terror organizations, that only serve their own twisted political/religous beliefs are the ones that need to be eliminated. They target civilians intentionally and they feed off destruction to grow, and to destabilize any form of progress. These groups, whether they reside in Palestine, India, Somalia or even America, need to understand that their actions are not justified and their followers need to be dealt with like the vermin that they are. Ultimately, they are the one primarily responsible for their own peoples suffering, on a magnitude much greater than their supposed enemies (which in a sick way are the only reason why the exist).

Yeah right. You've just lost all credibility with that paragraph. So, in your opinion, it would've been great if America conquered Iraq, set up a democratic government, and moved on to Iran without a single shot fired back, right? Same thing with Afghanistan? lol. This is pathetic. You think nations should just be able to walk over other nations and peoples without resistence? Or you think that we should support corrupt dictators and kings without any blowback? You're a freggin joke.

While I will admit that, in time, there will come a stable government that takes care of these militants, I'm telling you that these organizations are, among other things, the sword of a pissed off people that won't be pushed around any longer. For you to think that they are the root cause of what exists in their homeland is letting the invaders off too easily.

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Yeah right. You've just lost all credibility with that paragraph. So, in your opinion, it would've been great if America conquered Iraq, set up a democratic government, and moved on to Iran without a single shot fired back, right? Same thing with Afghanistan? lol. This is pathetic. You think nations should just be able to walk over other nations and peoples without resistence? Or you think that we should support corrupt dictators and kings without any blowback? You're a freggin joke.

While I will admit that, in time, there will come a stable government that takes care of these militants, I'm telling you that these organizations are, among other things, the sword of a pissed off people that won't be pushed around any longer. For you to think that they are the root cause of what exists in their homeland is letting the invaders off too easily.

Tell me Narmer, where did I state that? Please go back to my post and tell me where I thought countries have no right to protect themselves from aggression?
Again, your twisted apologies for terrorist organizations are the "freggin joke". Tell me Narmer, do you think it is justified for these organizations to blow up buses full of civilians, bridges, school yards, Sunni/Shiite people, markets, police stations, Mosques and other pillars of society for no reason other than to create turmoil and chaos? What the F&CK in GODS name does that have to do with the evil Americans? If they only targeted US soldiers it would be one thing, but they are killing their own people at a rate much higher than the Americans or as you call them the invaders could ever imagine! Now go ahead, justify that.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: Narmer

Yeah right. You've just lost all credibility with that paragraph. So, in your opinion, it would've been great if America conquered Iraq, set up a democratic government, and moved on to Iran without a single shot fired back, right? Same thing with Afghanistan? lol. This is pathetic. You think nations should just be able to walk over other nations and peoples without resistence? Or you think that we should support corrupt dictators and kings without any blowback? You're a freggin joke.

While I will admit that, in time, there will come a stable government that takes care of these militants, I'm telling you that these organizations are, among other things, the sword of a pissed off people that won't be pushed around any longer. For you to think that they are the root cause of what exists in their homeland is letting the invaders off too easily.

Tell me Narmer, where did I state that? Please go back to my post and tell me where I thought countries have no right to protect themselves from aggression?
Again, your twisted apologies for terrorist organizations are the "freggin joke". Tell me Narmer, do you think it is justified for these organizations to blow up buses full of civilians, bridges, school yards, Sunni/Shiite people, markets, police stations, Mosques and other pillars of society for no reason other than to create turmoil and chaos? What the F&CK in GODS name does that have to do with the evil Americans? If they only targeted US soldiers it would be one thing, but they are killing their own people at a rate much higher than the Americans or as you call them the invaders could ever imagine! Now go ahead, justify that.

Is it justified? That's not for me to answer. It's not my war. Not my business. However, I will say that the Iraqi people are suffering tremendously. I will also say that the militants' intention is to sow as much chaos as humanly possible so that America cannot build a stable, pro-American Iraq. That strategy I can understand and agree with. So, does the end justify the means? In a democratic society, it should. However, one has to ask if Iraq is a democratic society. That is an open question. A nation under occupation that is so divided and polarised that brother fights brother is not democratic in my opinion. Those purple fingers are a gimmick.

I will tell you another reason why it's a gimmick, THE OCCUPATION. Hell, a couple of months ago, Al Maliki give out a directive to his commanders. The US Military didn't agree with it so they arrested one of the Iraqi generals and put him jail. The US Military jailed an Iraqi general. If you consider that a democracy, then your definition of democracy must come from the Bush Administration. Even China and Saddam's Iraq has/had elections, but we wouldn't call it a democracy.

 

[Aimster]

Hillbilly versus Islamic Fanatic versus Jewish Fanatic, with the random redneck popping in and out. Discussing facts? 99.9% arguing opinion versus opinion.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hillbilly versus Islamic Fanatic versus Jewish Fanatic, with the random redneck popping in and out. Discussing facts? 99.9% arguing opinion versus opinion.

If you have nothing constructive to add, please leave.

 

[Aimster]

My statement was very constructive.

I think it is the best post in this entire thread

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Aimster
My statement was very constructive.

I think it is the best post in this entire thread

Leave.

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hillbilly versus Islamic Fanatic versus Jewish Fanatic, with the random redneck popping in and out. Discussing facts? 99.9% arguing opinion versus opinion.

Look its the village idiot!!!

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hillbilly versus Islamic Fanatic versus Jewish Fanatic, with the random redneck popping in and out. Discussing facts? 99.9% arguing opinion versus opinion.

In freemasonry, there is something called "extreme rebellion". I think Narmer's view (and those of the militants) is of that thinking. It happens throughout history with a very violent break from the past. Rupture is more appropriate. I doubt it is fanaticism.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Life isn't fair, but I don't try to simplify it simply for the sake of patriotism.

You are simplifying it, only that you don't realize it; making rationalization for terrorism is simplification of any issue/problem.

You can deflect that phrase from Judaism but it came right from your own people's bible. I called you out on it and now you're trying to say, well, everybody does it. Be a man and own up to it.

:laugh:

Oh, that's so funny: "your own people" -- how much you presume to know about me.

Still, you fail to make any point as I don't need to deflect or defend anything: the concept of an eye-for-eye has been with humanity forever -- it would be pointless to say that the koran probably has something to that extent since it is such an elementary concept.

So, what was your point?
We had 19 hijackers who were from the middle-class and were not opressed by the US directly or indirectly. Their illustrious financial backer is hardly someone who had suffered at the hands of the US.
So, it was vengence for what? Can you answer such a simple question?

Your arguments always end up with rationalizing terrorism, and that's what makes your thinking so insidious. Such rationalization have no place in the civilized world, otherwise I could just as easily go to China and go on a rampage because mfg. workers in the US are losing their jobs.

Was I directly affected by the job cuts? No, but neither were the 19 highjackers affected in a direct manner by anything that the US has, or supposedly done.
In fact, one has to wonder why didn't Bin-Laden sponsor a strike against petroleum installations in Saudi Arabia in order to bring attention to his cause (you "understand" his cause, right?); however, doing such a thing would probably lower his net-worth and cause him hardship with his three wives.

BECAUSE IT IS A MILITANT ORGANIZATION.

So remind me again how was their action justified?
Please do rationalize that for me.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Narmer
Life isn't fair, but I don't try to simplify it simply for the sake of patriotism.

You are simplifying it, only that you don't realize it; making rationalization for terrorism is simplification of any issue/problem.

You can deflect that phrase from Judaism but it came right from your own people's bible. I called you out on it and now you're trying to say, well, everybody does it. Be a man and own up to it.

:laugh:

Oh, that's so funny: "your own people" -- how much you presume to know about me.

Still, you fail to make any point as I don't need to deflect or defend anything: the concept of an eye-for-eye has been with humanity forever -- it would be pointless to say that the koran probably has something to that extent since it is such an elementary concept.

So, what was your point?
We had 19 hijackers who were from the middle-class and were not opressed by the US directly or indirectly. Their illustrious financial backer is hardly someone who had suffered at the hands of the US.
So, it was vengence for what? Can you answer such a simple question?

Your arguments always end up with rationalizing terrorism, and that's what makes your thinking so insidious. Such rationalization have no place in the civilized world, otherwise I could just as easily go to China and go on a rampage because mfg. workers in the US are losing their jobs.

Was I directly affected by the job cuts? No, but neither were the 19 highjackers affected in a direct manner by anything that the US has, or supposedly done.
In fact, one has to wonder why didn't Bin-Laden sponsor a strike against petroleum installations in Saudi Arabia in order to bring attention to his cause (you "understand" his cause, right?); however, doing such a thing would probably lower his net-worth and cause him hardship with his three wives.

BECAUSE IT IS A MILITANT ORGANIZATION.

So remind me again how was their action justified?
Please do rationalize that for me.

Just as you say their actions have no place in a civilized world, they say they are justified because of American support for bad arab gov'ts. I've already discussed the latter, but I can see that you are trying to go in circles. I won't follow you. However, I will say that your opinion and the militants' opinion do not match. Why should I choose one over the other, especially coming from someone who supports Israeli aggression against Palestinians? I won't. Instead, I will try to use reason to understand the savage acts that you and the militants support.

 

[imported_dna]

Huh?

You're the epitome of hypocrisy, pretending to be neutral and above all influence, yet in the same breath you speak of the "Israeli agression"; that's as laughable as the BBC supposed neutrality, where Israel retaliation for constant rocket fire has earned the front page with barely any mentioning of the rockets, and hints at some "slightly injured" Israelis while alluding to "reports" (as if they couldn't confirm it), while in the real world a woman was seriously injured.

Lemme guess -- Israeli agression again, right?

Anyhow, you've completely avoided my questions under the guise of matters you've already discussed; I guess we all needed your assistance in pointing it out to us that those 19 guys probably believed they were exacting vengance. That must be your benchmark now: "if they really believe in it, then it cannot be labeled terrorism."

Would you like to rebut by asking me to defend the tooth-for-a-tooth idea? It's also in the bible.

 

[GrGr]

Arabic under fire

A child on Hamas TV talked of annihilating the Jews ... or did she?
Brian Whitaker


The Guardian
May 15, 2007 9:30 PM | Printable version

Memri, the "research institute" which specialises in translating portions of the Arabic media into English, has issued a video clip from a children's programme on Hamas TV in which it claims that a Palestinian girl talked of becoming a suicide bomber and annihilating the Jews.

Memri - described by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman as "invaluable" - supplies translations free of charge to journalists, politicians and others, particularly in the US.

Though Memri claims to be "independent" and maintains that it does not "advocate causes or take sides", it is run by Yigal Carmon, a former colonel in Israeli military intelligence. Carmon's partner in setting up Memri was Meyrav Wurmser who in 1996 was one of the authors of the now-infamous "Clean Break" document which proposed reshaping Israel's "strategic environment" in the Middle East, starting with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

In the Hamas video clip issued by Memri, a Mickey Mouse lookalike asks a young girl what she will do "for the sake of al-Aqsa". Apparently trying to prompt an answer, the mouse makes a rifle-firing gesture and says "I'll shoot".

The child says: "I'm going to draw a picture."

Memri's translation ignores this remark and instead quotes the child (wrongly) as saying: "I'll shoot."

Pressed further by the mouse - "What are we going to do?" - the girl replies in Arabic: "Bidna nqawim." The normal translation of this would be "We're going to [or want to] resist" but Memri's translation puts a more aggressive spin on it: "We want to fight."

The mouse continues: "What then?"

According to Memri, the child replies: "We will annihilate the Jews."

The sound quality on the clip is not very good, but I have listened to it several times (as have a number of native Arabic speakers) and we can hear no word that might correspond to "annihilate".

What the girl seems to say is: "Bitokhoona al-yahood" - "The Jews will shoot us" or "The Jews are shooting us."

This is followed by further prompting - "We are going to defend al-Aqsa with our souls and blood, or are we not?"

Again, the girl's reply is not very clear, but it's either: "I'll become a martyr" or "We'll become martyrs."

In the context of the conversation, and in line with normal Arab-Islamic usage, martyrdom could simply mean being killed by the Israelis' shooting. However, Memri's translation of the sentence - "I will commit martyrdom" turns it into a deliberate act on the girl's part, and Colonel Carmon has since claimed that it refers to suicide bombers.

The overall effect of this is to change a conversation about resistance and sacrifice into a picture of unprovoked and seemingly motiveless aggression on the part of the Palestinians. But why hype the content in this way? Hamas's use of children's TV for propaganda purposes is clearly despicable, as the BBC, the Guardian and others have noted, without any need to exaggerate its content.

Among those misled by Memri's "translation" was Glenn Beck of CNN, who had planned to run it on his radio programme, until his producer told him to stop. Beck informed listeners this was because CNN's Arabic department had found "massive problems" with it.

Instead of broadcasting the tape, Beck then invited Carmon on to the programme and gave him a platform to denounce CNN's Arabic department, and in particular to accuse one of its staff, Octavia Nasr, of being ignorant about the language.

Carmon related a phone conversation he had had with Ms Nasr:

She said the sentence where it says [in Memri's translation] "We are going to ... we will annihilate the Jews", she said: "Well, our translators hear something else. They hear 'The Jews are shooting at us'."

I said to her: "You know, Octavia, the order of the words as you put it is upside down. You can't even get the order of the words right. Even someone who doesn't know Arabic would listen to the tape and would hear the word 'Jews' is at the end, and also it means it is something to be done to the Jews, not by the Jews."

And she insisted, no the word is in the beginning. I said: "Octavia, you just don't get it. It is at the end" ... She didn't know one from two, I mean.

Carmon's words succeeded in bamboozling Glenn "Israel shares my values" Beck, who told him: "This is amazing to me ... I appreciate all of your efforts. I appreciate what you do at Memri, it is important work."

It was indeed amazing, because in defending Memri's translation, Carmon took issue not only with CNN's Arabic department but also with all the Arabic grammar books. The word order in a typical Arabic sentence is not the same as in English: the verb comes first and so a sentence in Arabic which literally says "Are shooting at us the Jews" means "The Jews are shooting at us".

I have written about Memri's tweaking of translations before. One example was its manipulation of Osama bin Laden's speech on the eve of the last American presidential election (details here, at the end of the article). Another was an Egyptian newspaper's interview with the mufti of Jerusalem. Memri's translators changed the question: "How do you deal with the Jews who are besieging al-Aqsa and are scattered around it?" to "How do you feel about the Jews?" They then heavily edited the mufti's words to give an anti-semitic-sounding reply to the new question.

The curious thing about all this is that Memri's translations are usually accurate (though it is highly selective in what it chooses to translate and often removes things from their original context). When errors do occur, it's difficult to attribute them to incompetence or accidental lapses. As in the case of the children's TV programme, there appears to be a political motive.

The effect of this is to devalue everything Memri translates - good and bad alike. Responsible news organisations can't rely on anything it says without going back and checking its translations against the original Arabic.

So. More fair and balanced bs from Memri.

Remember this? Another example was when they distorted the Iranian presidents comments on Israel. People here on P&N still regurgitate the spin that Ahdmadenijad said that Israel should be "wiped off the map" when he never said so. The Guardian

 

[imported_dna]

Hmm, drawing pictures amid talk of blood, soul, and martydoom -- quite believeable. Also, answering "the jews are shooting at us" doesn't quite seem like a probable answer to "what are we going to do then?", but that just might be me.

As for wiped off the map, I guess Ahmadinejad has a crystal ball that tells him that Israel will, somehow, vanish out the pages of time.

Funny, it used to be the case that if someone told you that you'll vanish without a trace, it would -- for some odd reason -- be interpreted as a threat.
I guess Ahmadinejad and Farfur have one thing in common: they both are talking in abstract terms that don't tie in to events in our plane of existance.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: dna
Huh?

You're the epitome of hypocrisy, pretending to be neutral and above all influence, yet in the same breath you speak of the "Israeli agression"; that's as laughable as the BBC supposed neutrality, where Israel retaliation for constant rocket fire has earned the front page with barely any mentioning of the rockets, and hints at some "slightly injured" Israelis while alluding to "reports" (as if they couldn't confirm it), while in the real world a woman was seriously injured.

Lemme guess -- Israeli agression again, right?

Anyhow, you've completely avoided my questions under the guise of matters you've already discussed; I guess we all needed your assistance in pointing it out to us that those 19 guys probably believed they were exacting vengance. That must be your benchmark now: "if they really believe in it, then it cannot be labeled terrorism."

Would you like to rebut by asking me to defend the tooth-for-a-tooth idea? It's also in the bible.

I don't see the point of these discussions when you try to start it by labelling people and then using those same labels as reasons why they are this or that. IF you are trying to convince me, then you've completely failed and I suggest we stop. If, however, you are trying to show me new information then please do or else I will think you're reason here is for annoyance.

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: dna
Hmm, drawing pictures amid talk of blood, soul, and martydoom -- quite believeable. Also, answering "the jews are shooting at us" doesn't quite seem like a probable answer to "what are we going to do then?", but that just might be me.

As for wiped off the map, I guess Ahmadinejad has a crystal ball that tells him that Israel will, somehow, vanish out the pages of time.

Funny, it used to be the case that if someone told you that you'll vanish without a trace, it would -- for some odd reason -- be interpreted as a threat.
I guess Ahmadinejad and Farfur have one thing in common: they both are talking in abstract terms that don't tie in to events in our plane of existance.

Well I think the situation in the ME is precarious enough that we don't need Neocon translators to put a pro-Israeli spin on things.