Get your crayons and hashtags ready, regressives.  Another terrorist attack in France.

Another one

if you knew there was another thread on it, why did you start this one?

John Smith wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:12pm:

Another one if you knew there was another thread on it, why did you start this one?

Is there?  You taking over from Aussie how, John?

Which religion was it? We keep being told that there extremist elements in all religions so it could have being any right??

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:13pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:12pm: Another one if you knew there was another thread on it, why did you start this one? Is there?  You taking over from Aussie how, John?

with your thread title? How could I pass up the opportunity??  ;D ;D ;D

matty wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:13pm:

Which religion was it? We keep being told that there extremist elements in all religions so it could have being any right??

The peaceful one. 

But you know, regressives like Gweggy will be happy to know that it was a catholic priest who has his their throat slit open. 

John Smith wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:13pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:13pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:12pm: Another one if you knew there was another thread on it, why did you start this one? Is there?  You taking over from Aussie how, John? with your thread title? How could I pass up the opportunity??  ;D ;D ;D

Touché ;)

What's the hashtag going to be, regressives? Has anyone organised one yet? How about #standWithChurch? Oh wait... Can't have that one now can we...

They reckon it was an Arab that did it.


http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/hostages-taken-in-french-church-in-normandy-region/news-story/77883e137bf0b52683640764527f5c96

Poll.

Deport them all to Israel

Its time wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:42pm:

Deport them all to Israel

Why, regressive?  Are they from Israel?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:14pm:

matty wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:13pm: Which religion was it? We keep being told that there extremist elements in all religions so it could have being any right?? The peaceful one.  But you know, regressives like Gweggy will be happy to know that it was a catholic priest who has his their throat slit open.

True and they will talk about all the extremist attacks by other religions but fail to give actual examples.

Its time wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:42pm:

Deport them all to Israel

Yes, why should the Jews have their own nation? It's not like they are the most persecuted people in history is it? Not like they were the original inhabitants of the Middle East or anything is it?  ::)

Get your discounted crayons, regressives!  Time to start drawing love hearts!

http://www6.discountschoolsupply.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?category=49

matty wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:49pm:

Its time wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:42pm: Deport them all to Israel Yes, why should the Jews have their own nation? It's not like they are the most persecuted people in history is it? Not like they were the original inhabitants of the Middle East or anything is it?  ::)

Really?  How come they are in such a small minority in the ME now?

matty wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:47pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:14pm: matty wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:13pm: Which religion was it? We keep being told that there extremist elements in all religions so it could have being any right?? The peaceful one.  But you know, regressives like Gweggy will be happy to know that it was a catholic priest who has his their throat slit open.  True and they will talk about all the extremist attacks by other religions but fail to give actual examples.

No, the regressives are just irrational.  Of course all religions have their problems, and if we were to start from scratch id advocate for no religion ever.  But just like paedophilia in the clergy is a Catholic Church problem (despite not emerging from Catholic teachings), so is Islamic terrorism a problem for Islam; which has emerged directly from Islamic teachings.  And yet regressives refuse to acknowledge this: when it comes to Islam it is a religion of peace and if you say anything bad about it then you're an Islamaphobe.

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:01pm:

matty wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:49pm: Its time wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:42pm: Deport them all to Israel Yes, why should the Jews have their own nation? It's not like they are the most persecuted people in history is it? Not like they were the original inhabitants of the Middle East or anything is it?  ::) Really?  How come they are in such a small minority in the ME now?

And even in their minority you still want to blame them for all the ills that a billion people go through.  It must be all the Jews fault, not the teachings of Islam.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:04pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:01pm: matty wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:49pm: Its time wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:42pm: Deport them all to Israel Yes, why should the Jews have their own nation? It's not like they are the most persecuted people in history is it? Not like they were the original inhabitants of the Middle East or anything is it?  ::) Really?  How come they are in such a small minority in the ME now? And even in their minority you still want to blame them for all the ills that a billion people go through.  It must be all the Jews fault, not the teachings of Islam.

Where did I say that, cupcake?

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:12pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:04pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:01pm: matty wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:49pm: Its time wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:42pm: Deport them all to Israel Yes, why should the Jews have their own nation? It's not like they are the most persecuted people in history is it? Not like they were the original inhabitants of the Middle East or anything is it?  ::) Really?  How come they are in such a small minority in the ME now? And even in their minority you still want to blame them for all the ills that a billion people go through.  It must be all the Jews fault, not the teachings of Islam. Where did I say that, cupcake?

You say it every time you try and suggest israel can be moved to Tasmania, sweet heart.

No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head.

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:14pm:

No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head.

And whys that? 

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:19pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?

You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in?

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:21pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in?

Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:22pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around.

Really......what was that little glitch in 1967?  Have you ever read the comments of Mr Hicks about the neighbours of Israel?

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:24pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. Really......what was that little glitch in 1967?  Have you ever read the comments of Mr Hicks about the neighbours of Israel?

The neighbours of Israel are ruled by their doctrines from the "peaceful" religion of Islam, which they claim tells them to hate all Jewish people... You Know... Out of love of course.  And 1967, remind us who started to mobilise first and who wanted peaceful negotiations?

Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?'

Quote:

The neighbours of Israel are ruled by their doctrines from the "peaceful" religion of Islam, which they claim tells them to hate all Jewish people... You Know... Out of love of course.

Was that just something written into the Koran in 1949?


Quote:

And 1967, remind us who started to mobilise first and who wanted peaceful negotiations?

That'll be a chicken/egg discussion.  Fact is, Israel invaded its neighbours militarily.  Yeas, they say it was by way of pre-emptive strike, but fact is.............they did the invading/attacking, and that cannot be denied.

So much for your original comment ~ "Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries."

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:29pm:

Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?'

Relevance of Israel in a thread with muslims chopping a priests head off in France?

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:29pm:

Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?'

Sure, and I agree that this must end.
But it's hardly the actions of a mongoose on snakes.  Remind us which wannabe state still is led by people who have in their manifesto the desire to kill all Jewish people?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:34pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Relevance of Israel in a thread with muslims chopping a priests head off in France?

Ask The Duke.  See Post # 11.

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:14pm:

No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head.

the Jews were there first.....at least thats what the Bible claims... Jerusalem is still a sore point...

I am still trying to figure out what the difference is between Arabs and Jews.......

I think it may be the Jews have grown  into the year 2016..

and the Arabs are still living a thousand years ago... ::) ::)

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:33pm:

Quote: The neighbours of Israel are ruled by their doctrines from the "peaceful" religion of Islam, which they claim tells them to hate all Jewish people... You Know... Out of love of course. Was that just something written into the Koran in 1949? [quote]And 1967, remind us who started to mobilise first and who wanted peaceful negotiations?

That'll be a chicken/egg discussion.  Fact is, Israel invaded its neighbours militarily.  Yeas, they say it was by way of pre-emptive strike, but fact is.............they did the invading/attacking, and that cannot be denied.

So much for your original comment ~ "Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries."[/quote]

You don't understand preemptive?  Is this another pasifist trait to just sit back and hope all is fine when people around you are saying things such as "we will enter Palestine with ts soil saturated in blood" or that it's the duty of all Syrians to liberate the unsurped land?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:34pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Relevance of Israel in a thread with muslims chopping a priests head off in France?

Deflection.
Every attack pushes France and Germany to right wing Govts.  Every attack will meant new ONP senators and more.  Pendulum over swing is going to be brutal.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:35pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Sure, and I agree that this must end. But it's hardly the actions of a mongoose on snakes.  Remind us which wannabe state still is led by people who have in their manifesto the desire to kill all Jewish people?

I'll ask you again.....when was that 'manisfesto' created?

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:38pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:35pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Sure, and I agree that this must end. But it's hardly the actions of a mongoose on snakes.  Remind us which wannabe state still is led by people who have in their manifesto the desire to kill all Jewish people? I'll ask you again.....when was that 'manisfesto' created?

The relevance? 

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:37pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:34pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Relevance of Israel in a thread with muslims chopping a priests head off in France? Ask The Duke.  See Post # 11.

Ask the antisemite leftwinger and ask your constant denial that Israel has a right to exist where it is.

Quote:

I am still trying to figure out what the difference is between Arabs and Jews.......

None in my mind.  You are referring to Judeans, and so far as my definition is concerned, they are included in the way I am using the word Arabs.  A more strict definition of an Arab is one who speaks Arabic. 

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:39pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:38pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:35pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Sure, and I agree that this must end. But it's hardly the actions of a mongoose on snakes.  Remind us which wannabe state still is led by people who have in their manifesto the desire to kill all Jewish people? I'll ask you again.....when was that 'manisfesto' created? The relevance?

I'll hit you with the relevance after you answer the question.  You are not trying to avoid the question are you?

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:42pm:

A more strict definition of an Arab is one who speaks Arabic.

Itbach el Yahud.... I aint no Arab.

Does speaking French also make someone French Arsie?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:46pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:42pm: A more strict definition of an Arab is one who speaks Arabic.  Itbach el Yahud.... I aint no Arab. Does speaking French also make someone French Arsie?

How ever so clevah of you.

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:56pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:46pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:42pm: A more strict definition of an Arab is one who speaks Arabic.  Itbach el Yahud.... I aint no Arab. Does speaking French also make someone French Arsie? How ever so clevah of you.

Stick to driving taxis Arsie.  ;D

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:44pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:39pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:38pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:35pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Sure, and I agree that this must end. But it's hardly the actions of a mongoose on snakes.  Remind us which wannabe state still is led by people who have in their manifesto the desire to kill all Jewish people? I'll ask you again.....when was that 'manisfesto' created? The relevance?  I'll hit you with the relevance after you answer the question.  You are not trying to avoid the question are you?

Go ahead and hit with "the relevance".  Are you still searching for one?

Quote:

Go ahead and hit with "the relevance".  Are you still searching for one?

You have not answered my question yet.  You have avoided doing so.  You answer, and the relevance will become very apparent.

I'll look forward the answer tomorrow.  Bed for me.

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 11:22pm:

Quote: Go ahead and hit with "the relevance".  Are you still searching for one? You have not answered my question yet.  You have avoided doing so.  You answer, and the relevance will become very apparent.

Nope, it's all fundamentally irrelevant.  Just go ahead and "try" and make your point :)

cods wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:37pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. the Jews were there first.....at least thats what the Bible claims... Jerusalem is still a sore point... I am still trying to figure out what the difference is between Arabs and Jews....... I think it may be the Jews have grown  into the year 2016.. and the Arabs are still living a thousand years ago... ::) ::)

The middle east is a wall to wall horror show of tyrannical leaders, regressive religion, violence, misogyny and backwards culture.

Israel is but a pinprick in size compared to the rest of the middle east yet it's a bastion of democracy and a powerhouse of scientific innovation, scientific research and the likes of Aussie think that removing Israel (moving it to Tasmania LOL) will somehow magically transform and fix all the problems of the regressive Muslim failed states.

Perhaps if they were encourage to be more like Israel?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 11:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 11:22pm: Quote: Go ahead and hit with "the relevance".  Are you still searching for one? You have not answered my question yet.  You have avoided doing so.  You answer, and the relevance will become very apparent. Nope, it's all fundamentally irrelevant.  Just go ahead and "try" and make your point :)

I guess the question was too hard.  Would you like me to re-type it?

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 7:54am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 11:24pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 11:22pm: Quote: Go ahead and hit with "the relevance".  Are you still searching for one? You have not answered my question yet.  You have avoided doing so.  You answer, and the relevance will become very apparent. Nope, it's all fundamentally irrelevant.  Just go ahead and "try" and make your point :) I guess the question was too hard.  Would you like me to re-type it?

Why would you waste so much time, Aussie? If you had a point you should've already made it by now. This type of back and forth is incredibly boring.

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:38pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:35pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:29pm: Further....why is Israel grabbing land through what they call 'settlements?' Sure, and I agree that this must end. But it's hardly the actions of a mongoose on snakes.  Remind us which wannabe state still is led by people who have in their manifesto the desire to kill all Jewish people? I'll ask you again.....when was that 'manisfesto' created?

Answer the question!!!!!

So, regressives, what's the hashtag we are using for this one?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:40am:

So, regressives, what's the hashtag we are using for this one?

#illcuttheheadofapriestoffwithyou

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:14pm:

No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head.

We eh? We?  Well that includes you then.

So you and others "plonked it" ie Israel where it currently is?

Apart from dribbling online, haven't you got a taxi cab to drive anymore?

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:22am:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. We eh? We?  Well that includes you then. So you and others plonked Israel where it currently is? Haven't you got a taxi cab to drive today?

Plonked.  No problem with all the people being PLONKED in Sydney. 

Its time wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 9:42pm:

Deport them all to Israel

[smiley=tekst-toppie.gif]

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:01pm:

matty wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:49pm: Its time wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 9:42pm: Deport them all to Israel Yes, why should the Jews have their own nation? It's not like they are the most persecuted people in history is it? Not like they were the original inhabitants of the Middle East or anything is it?  ::) Really?  How come they are in such a small minority in the ME now?

4000 years of history?  lots of breeding gone on in that time.

Aussie wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:24pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. Really......what was that little glitch in 1967?  Have you ever read the comments of Mr Hicks about the neighbours of Israel?

what glitch?  The arabs invaded and got their butts handed to them.

Rubbish.   They never even got close.

http://www.theocracywatch.org/maps_before_after_six_day_war.jpg

I like voting in polls but the poll choices are stupid..

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 4:07pm:

Rubbish.   They never even got close. http://www.theocracywatch.org/maps_before_after_six_day_war.jpg

maybe you could look at those maps again which show Israel occupying large swathes of extra land after the war. The Arabs got flogged militarily and in 1972 the same happened again. I think it was Sadat who aid 'Israeli soldiers are trained to shoot but Arab soldiers are rained to march'.  and boy did it show.

Agnes wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 4:11pm:

I like voting in polls but the poll choices are stupid..

Which option is missing?

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 4:07pm:

Rubbish.   They never even got close. http://www.theocracywatch.org/maps_before_after_six_day_war.jpg

So israel defends itself and youre upset about what, the fact that the arabian countries lost their attack?  Those poor nations, who declared palestine will be filled with jewish blood, all losing.  You must be so upset.

Gordon wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:16am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:40am: So, regressives, what's the hashtag we are using for this one? #illcuttheheadofapriestoffwithyou

Sounds like something the regressives can support.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 4:20pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 4:07pm: Rubbish.   They never even got close. http://www.theocracywatch.org/maps_before_after_six_day_war.jpg So israel defends itself and youre upset about what, the fact that the arabian countries lost their attack?  Those poor nations, who declared palestine will be filled with jewish blood, all losing.  You must be so upset.

The only reason this came up was because you asserted Israel never attacked anyone.  It has.  Are you going to answer my question, now?  Just say so if you are not, and I'll forget about it.

Muslims have been attacking the Jews ever since Muhammad started peddling that horse manure called Islam.

Take note of the muslim dating methods with Muhammad capturing his jewish wife Juwairiya whose husband was killed by muslims on the very same day Muhammad married her.

Sunnah.com/muslim/32/1

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 4:31pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 4:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 4:07pm: Rubbish.   They never even got close. http://www.theocracywatch.org/maps_before_after_six_day_war.jpg So israel defends itself and youre upset about what, the fact that the arabian countries lost their attack?  Those poor nations, who declared palestine will be filled with jewish blood, all losing.  You must be so upset. The only reason this came up was because you asserted Israel never attacked anyone.  It has.  Are you going to answer my question, now?  Just say so if you are not, and I'll forget about it.

I don't think you grasp things very well.  If Israel didn't feel threatened by all its neighbours, whose leaders were shouting for Jewish blood, then there would be no pre emptive strikes.  Egyptian troops were en route. It isn't an attack. It is a defensive strategy.  But I understand how this can fly over the head of a self professed pasifist.  I suppose you think Israel could've defended itself with many cardboard cut outs of hearts?  Or perhaps organised a really really big vigil?  Those candles will stop forces with Jewish blood lust approaching on Israel borders!

As for your question I've already given you an answer, which is very simple: if you have a point to make then go ahead, there's no need to wait for me. But to constantly beg me for a date, which is utterly irrelevant, is not really going to get us anywhere in this discussion.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:22pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around.

For a country that has "no interest", it seems to have expanded his borders rather considerably from what the UN decreed they should be in 1948.   It also seems to have undertaken several wars of aggression against it's neighbours - 1956/1982/etc.   ::)

cods wrote on Jul 26^th, 2016 at 10:37pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. the Jews were there first.....at least thats what the Bible claims... Jerusalem is still a sore point...

The overwhelming majority of the Jews migrated away from Palestine after the Jewish revolt against Roman Rule.

Those that have returned since 1948 have had little to do with Palestine for nearly 2000 years and even less relationship with the Jews that once inhabited the area.   ::)

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:22am:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. We eh? We?  Well that includes you then. So you and others "plonked it" ie Israel where it currently is? Apart from dribbling online, haven't you got a taxi cab to drive anymore?

Your ignorance is showing, Lisa, I'd shut up while you're ahead...   ::)

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 4:05pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:24pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. Really......what was that little glitch in 1967?  Have you ever read the comments of Mr Hicks about the neighbours of Israel? what glitch?  The arabs invaded and got their butts handed to them.

The "Arabs" failed to cross the border of the modern State of Israel.  Hardly an invasion...   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:19pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 4:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:24pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. Really......what was that little glitch in 1967?  Have you ever read the comments of Mr Hicks about the neighbours of Israel? what glitch?  The arabs invaded and got their butts handed to them. The "Arabs" failed to cross the border of the modern State of Israel.  Hardly an invasion...   ::)

Its the intent that counts, not whether they did or not. The preemptive strikes stopped them.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:17pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:22am: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. We eh? We?  Well that includes you then. So you and others "plonked it" ie Israel where it currently is? Apart from dribbling online, haven't you got a taxi cab to drive anymore? Your ignorance is showing, Lisa, I'd shut up while you're ahead...   ::)

The plonkers think we plonked it.  :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:28pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:22am: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. We eh? We?  Well that includes you then. So you and others "plonked it" ie Israel where it currently is? Apart from dribbling online, haven't you got a taxi cab to drive anymore? Your ignorance is showing, Lisa, I'd shut up while you're ahead...   ::) The plonkers think we plonked it.  :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D

Well...that is what the West did in 1949.  Plonked the artificial State of Israel right smack down bang in the middle of a bunch of pissed orf Arabs.  And who could have not failed to predict how well that was going to work out....yeas, they'd be plonkers.

Hey, Dukey, when are you going to tell us about that Muslim manisfesto?  When did that come into existence?

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:43pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:28pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:22am: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. We eh? We?  Well that includes you then. So you and others "plonked it" ie Israel where it currently is? Apart from dribbling online, haven't you got a taxi cab to drive anymore? Your ignorance is showing, Lisa, I'd shut up while you're ahead...   ::) The plonkers think we plonked it.  :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D Well...that is what the West did in 1949.  Plonked the artificial State of Israel right smack down bang in the middle of a bunch of pissed orf Arabs.  And who could have not failed to predict how well that was going to work out....yeas, they'd be plonkers. Hey, Dukey, when are you going to tell us about that Muslim manisfesto?  When did that come into existence?

"AUSSIE" is an anti Semite.  He probably has Nazi in his Ancestry.

I considered reporting this gross abuse, but I doubt you'd like the ban period given the recent holidays you've already had.  I'll content myself asking you for evidence, and if you can't come up with any, I'll then decide whether I bother the Mods with your stupidity.


Quote:

"AUSSIE" is an anti Semite.  He probably has Nazi in his Ancestry.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:11pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. For a country that has "no interest", it seems to have expanded his borders rather considerably from what the UN decreed they should be in 1948.   It also seems to have undertaken several wars of aggression against it's neighbours - 1956/1982/etc.   ::)

Well perhaps if the fascism didn't exist in the Middle East then Israel would have no need to feel threatened.  Of course Israel is not innocent in all actions and definitely the settlements have to be stopped, but when we look at the overall aggression in the region, all of it stems from the hatred over Jewish people. 1956 - Israel believed it was going to be attacked. 1967, the region waged war, 1982, who fired the first shots?  I know, I know, you don't like Israel. But it's the root cause they always matters: not just your hatred for Israel.

Quote:

1956 - Israel believed it was going to be attacked. 1967, the region waged war, 1982, who fired the first shots?  I know, I know, you don't like Israel. But it's the root cause they always matters: not just your hatred for Israel.

None of which would have happened would it, but for the dumb decision in 1949.  While Israel exists as a State in that Land, there will be trouble, always.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:00pm:

I considered reporting this gross abuse, but I doubt you'd like the ban period given the recent holidays you've already had.  I'll content myself asking you for evidence, and if you can't come up with any, I'll then decide whether I bother the Mods with your stupidity. Quote: "AUSSIE" is an anti Semite.  He probably has Nazi in his Ancestry.

a bit has to be said why you think its Israel that needs to move to Tasmania.  How about we move Gazza strip?

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:19pm:

Quote: 1956 - Israel believed it was going to be attacked. 1967, the region waged war, 1982, who fired the first shots?  I know, I know, you don't like Israel. But it's the root cause they always matters: not just your hatred for Israel. None of which would have happened would it, but for the dumb decision in 1949.  While Israel exists as a State in that Land, there will be trouble, always.

So we must succumb to fascism rather than stand strong against it?  Fck you're the worst pacifist on here. Israel has every right to exist where it is.

personally I think its none of our business where these countries are or who they get on with...

maybe if we minded our own business this country would be in better shape....as it is.. I cant see where we get off telling any other country what they should be doing... :D :D :D

cods wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:26pm:

personally I think its none of our business where these countries are or who they get on with... maybe if we minded our own business this country would be in better shape....as it is.. I cant see where we get off telling any other country what they should be doing... :D :D :D

Now that I agree with.  The instant the West ceases having a presence there, and withdraws all support to all Countries there, the better.

Let them sort it out themselves.  Arabia is for Arabs.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:29pm:

cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 6:26pm: personally I think its none of our business where these countries are or who they get on with... maybe if we minded our own business this country would be in better shape....as it is.. I cant see where we get off telling any other country what they should be doing... :D :D :D Now that I agree with.  The instant the West ceases having a presence there, and withdraws all support to all Countries there, the better. Let them sort it out themselves.  Arabia is for Arabs.

Rascist.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:32pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 6:29pm: cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 6:26pm: personally I think its none of our business where these countries are or who they get on with... maybe if we minded our own business this country would be in better shape....as it is.. I cant see where we get off telling any other country what they should be doing... :D :D :D Now that I agree with.  The instant the West ceases having a presence there, and withdraws all support to all Countries there, the better. Let them sort it out themselves.  Arabia is for Arabs. Rascist.

Nah.  Arabia is for Arabs.

cods wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:26pm:

personally I think its none of our business where these countries are or who they get on with... maybe if we minded our own business this country would be in better shape....as it is.. I cant see where we get off telling any other country what they should be doing... :D :D :D

Because the notion of human rights isn't just for the west. And when it's obvious they people are under regimes that 1) deny human rights and 2) can't be overthrown then it's the duty of all of us, every person, to stand up together. 

Not doing so perpetrates this idea that human rights are only for the well off white western world. The rest can go fck themselves?  Well... According to Aussie anyway, seems he's okay with people dying, as long as they aren't white.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:34pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 6:32pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 6:29pm: cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 6:26pm: personally I think its none of our business where these countries are or who they get on with... maybe if we minded our own business this country would be in better shape....as it is.. I cant see where we get off telling any other country what they should be doing... :D :D :D Now that I agree with.  The instant the West ceases having a presence there, and withdraws all support to all Countries there, the better. Let them sort it out themselves.  Arabia is for Arabs. Rascist. Nah.  Arabia is for Arabs.

Yes, and universal human rights are for all, rascist.

Quote:

Because the notion of human rights isn't just for the west. And when it's obvious they people are under regimes that 1) deny human rights and 2) can't be overthrown then it's the duty of all of us, every person, to stand up together.

And sing Kumbayah?  Or.......whinge, wail, gnash teeth, beat chests.....invade.....what?


Quote:

Not doing so perpetrates this idea that human rights are only for the well off white western world. The rest can go fck themselves?  Well... According to Aussie anyway, seems he's okay with people dying, as long as they aren't white.

Duke, where does that come from?  You seem to have a binary view and also, apparently, seek to impose it on everyone else.  Tell me, what are you doing about the rights of Eskimo women?

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 7:35pm:

Quote: Because the notion of human rights isn't just for the west. And when it's obvious they people are under regimes that 1) deny human rights and 2) can't be overthrown then it's the duty of all of us, every person, to stand up together. And sing Kumbayah?  Or.......whinge, wail, gnash teeth, beat chests.....invade.....what? [quote]Not doing so perpetrates this idea that human rights are only for the well off white western world. The rest can go fck themselves?  Well... According to Aussie anyway, seems he's okay with people dying, as long as they aren't white.

Duke, where does that come from?  You seem to have a binary view and also, apparently, seek to impose it on everyone else.  Tell me, what are you doing about the rights of Eskimo women?

[/quote]

What's the grey in universal human rights, exactly?

Duke reminds me of those coppers that shoot blacks ..... because they're black !

Def a full right wing rtard garnished with jew . The worst of the worst .

Its time wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:14pm:

Duke reminds me of those coppers that shoot blacks ..... because they're black ! Def a full right wing rtard garnished with jew . The worst of the worst .

Do you want to elaborate, antisemite? Or are you just one of those dumbsh1t people that come in to post some stupendous comment and then run away to continue sticking carrots up where the sun don't shine?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:09pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 7:35pm: Quote: Because the notion of human rights isn't just for the west. And when it's obvious they people are under regimes that 1) deny human rights and 2) can't be overthrown then it's the duty of all of us, every person, to stand up together. And sing Kumbayah?  Or.......whinge, wail, gnash teeth, beat chests.....invade.....what? [quote]Not doing so perpetrates this idea that human rights are only for the well off white western world. The rest can go fck themselves?  Well... According to Aussie anyway, seems he's okay with people dying, as long as they aren't white. Duke, where does that come from?  You seem to have a binary view and also, apparently, seek to impose it on everyone else.  Tell me, what are you doing about the rights of Eskimo women?

What's the grey in universal human rights, exactly?[/quote]

Perhaps it is time you set them out in detail.  The floor is yours, Duke.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:22pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 7:35pm: Quote: Because the notion of human rights isn't just for the west. And when it's obvious they people are under regimes that 1) deny human rights and 2) can't be overthrown then it's the duty of all of us, every person, to stand up together. And sing Kumbayah?  Or.......whinge, wail, gnash teeth, beat chests.....invade.....what? [quote]Not doing so perpetrates this idea that human rights are only for the well off white western world. The rest can go fck themselves?  Well... According to Aussie anyway, seems he's okay with people dying, as long as they aren't white. Duke, where does that come from?  You seem to have a binary view and also, apparently, seek to impose it on everyone else.  Tell me, what are you doing about the rights of Eskimo women? What's the grey in universal human rights, exactly?

Perhaps it is time you set them out in detail.  The floor is yours, Duke.
[/quote]

Un human rights charter.

Any objections?

News just in: 44 dead in Syria due to IS car bomb.

Regressives, new hashtag please!  Last one didn't seem to work.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:45pm:

News just in: 44 dead in Syria due to IS car bomb. Regressives, new hashtag please!  Last one didn't seem to work.

Isn't there a War going on there?

These, Duke?

Link.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:51pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:45pm: News just in: 44 dead in Syria due to IS car bomb. Regressives, new hashtag please!  Last one didn't seem to work. Isn't there a War going on there?

And who's winning? Or you're okay with universal human rights being denied as long as "there's a war going on there?"

So, Aussie, is the un human rights charter a good standard to set for the meaning of universal human rights?  What's grey in it?  Or are you okay with rights denied as long as it's "them" and not "us", a fundamentally rascist view.

What about all the good things Hitler did?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:45pm: News just in: 44 dead in Syria due to IS car bomb. Regressives, new hashtag please!  Last one didn't seem to work. Isn't there a War going on there? And who's winning? Or you're okay with universal human rights being denied as long as "there's a war going on there?"

There are very few rights in a War, Duke.  Both sides get to beat the schit out of each other until there is one still standing.


Quote:

So, Aussie, is the un human rights charter a good standard to set for the meaning of universal human rights?  What's grey in it?

I've just put up a link.  ^^^^^^^  Is that what you are referring to?



Quote:

Or are you okay with rights denied as long as it's "them" and not "us", a fundamentally rascist view.

We need to agree on a list of these Rights before I can answer that Duke.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:45pm: News just in: 44 dead in Syria due to IS car bomb. Regressives, new hashtag please!  Last one didn't seem to work. Isn't there a War going on there? And who's winning? Or you're okay with universal human rights being denied as long as "there's a war going on there?" There are very few rights in a War, Duke.  Both sides get to beat the schit out of each other until there is one still standing. Quote: So, Aussie, is the un human rights charter a good standard to set for the meaning of universal human rights?  What's grey in it? I've just put up a link.  ^^^^^^^  Is that what you are referring to? [quote]Or are you okay with rights denied as long as it's "them" and not "us", a fundamentally rascist view.

We need to agree on a list of these Rights before I can answer that Duke.
[/quote]

You are terrible at Google Aussie.  "UN human rights charter."  Not hard.

Its time wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:58pm:

What about all the good things Hitler did?

Such as?

.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 6:16pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:11pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. For a country that has "no interest", it seems to have expanded his borders rather considerably from what the UN decreed they should be in 1948.   It also seems to have undertaken several wars of aggression against it's neighbours - 1956/1982/etc.   ::) Well perhaps if the fascism didn't exist in the Middle East then Israel would have no need to feel threatened.  Of course Israel is not innocent in all actions and definitely the settlements have to be stopped, but when we look at the overall aggression in the region, all of it stems from the hatred over Jewish people. 1956 - Israel believed it was going to be attacked. 1967, the region waged war, 1982, who fired the first shots?  I know, I know, you don't like Israel. But it's the root cause they always matters: not just your hatred for Israel.

I am still unsure why you associate Islam with Fascism when the two are not interconnected in any way.  Indeed, Fascism has it's original roots in Christianity.

You acknowledge that Israel is paranoid.  Perhaps with reason by it has exploited the situation it has found itself in and greatly expanding it's borders.  It has also decided that ethnic cleansing through colonisation is a valid policy and how it should act towards the people under it's care through it's occupation of the Occupied Territories.   This is not tolerable, anywhere else in the world (remember what Bush Senior said about it in 1990?) but apparently acceptable to Washington in Palestine.   You don't seem to see that this is contributing to and perhaps even causing the hatred of the Israelis amongst the Arab population.    ::)

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 8:53pm:

These, Duke? Link.

Oi....Dukey???????  Did you see this before you made a tit of yourself?

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:11pm:

Perhaps, given how terrible I am at Google, you ought put up the link to your own material?

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/


Aren't you a lawyer? How do you not know the universal human rights?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:10pm:

Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:58pm: What about all the good things Hitler did? Such as?

He got the remaining jews moved to Israel, rather than Tasmania? ::)

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:27pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:19pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 4:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:24pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. Really......what was that little glitch in 1967?  Have you ever read the comments of Mr Hicks about the neighbours of Israel? what glitch?  The arabs invaded and got their butts handed to them. The "Arabs" failed to cross the border of the modern State of Israel.  Hardly an invasion...   ::) Its the intent that counts, not whether they did or not. The preemptive strikes stopped them.

Wrong.  There was no intent in 1956.  The 1956 was a war that was manufacture - conspired by Israel, the UK and France in order to try and grab back the Suez Canal from the Egyptian people.   This has been clearly laid out in all the history books written since then.   The Egyptians didn't even have batteries in their tanks - having removed them to charge them - when the Israelis attacked in a completely unprovoked manner.    ::)

Neferti wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:55pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:43pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:28pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:22am: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. We eh? We?  Well that includes you then. So you and others "plonked it" ie Israel where it currently is? Apart from dribbling online, haven't you got a taxi cab to drive anymore? Your ignorance is showing, Lisa, I'd shut up while you're ahead...   ::) The plonkers think we plonked it.  :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D Well...that is what the West did in 1949.  Plonked the artificial State of Israel right smack down bang in the middle of a bunch of pissed orf Arabs.  And who could have not failed to predict how well that was going to work out....yeas, they'd be plonkers. Hey, Dukey, when are you going to tell us about that Muslim manisfesto?  When did that come into existence? "AUSSIE" is an anti Semite.  He probably has Nazi in his Ancestry.

Godwin's Law.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:12pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 6:16pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:11pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. For a country that has "no interest", it seems to have expanded his borders rather considerably from what the UN decreed they should be in 1948.   It also seems to have undertaken several wars of aggression against it's neighbours - 1956/1982/etc.   ::) Well perhaps if the fascism didn't exist in the Middle East then Israel would have no need to feel threatened.  Of course Israel is not innocent in all actions and definitely the settlements have to be stopped, but when we look at the overall aggression in the region, all of it stems from the hatred over Jewish people. 1956 - Israel believed it was going to be attacked. 1967, the region waged war, 1982, who fired the first shots?  I know, I know, you don't like Israel. But it's the root cause they always matters: not just your hatred for Israel. I am still unsure why you associate Islam with Fascism when the two are not interconnected in any way.  Indeed, Fascism has it's original roots in Christianity. You acknowledge that Israel is paranoid.  Perhaps with reason by it has exploited the situation it has found itself in and greatly expanding it's borders.  It has also decided that ethnic cleansing through colonisation is a valid policy and how it should act towards the people under it's care through it's occupation of the Occupied Territories.   This is not tolerable, anywhere else in the world (remember what Bush Senior said about it in 1990?) but apparently acceptable to Washington in Palestine.   You don't seem to see that this is contributing to and perhaps even causing the hatred of the Israelis amongst the Arab population.    ::)

We agreed that you have no idea what fascism means, or how it has has been inflicted into the Middle East. And this is proven yet again by your irrelevant comment regarding Christianity (sure roots may be from Christianity but we are concerned with where it exists in the present day).

Israel has a right to be paranoid, given the fasiscm it finds itself surrounded by.

And what ethnic cleansing? Is this another of those things you've heard from some antisemite but fail to comprehend yourself becauae, well, let's face it you haven't really got many things right so far.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:14pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:53pm: These, Duke? Link. Oi....Dukey???????  Did you see this before you made a tit of yourself?

My point is give the actually primary source.  You need to do better googling, sweetheart.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:20pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:14pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:53pm: These, Duke? Link. Oi....Dukey???????  Did you see this before you made a tit of yourself? My point is give the actually primary source.  You need to do better googling, sweetheart.

....and mine is to get an agreed list.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:16pm:

Neferti wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:55pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:43pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:28pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:17pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:22am: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. We eh? We?  Well that includes you then. So you and others "plonked it" ie Israel where it currently is? Apart from dribbling online, haven't you got a taxi cab to drive anymore? Your ignorance is showing, Lisa, I'd shut up while you're ahead...   ::) The plonkers think we plonked it.  :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D Well...that is what the West did in 1949.  Plonked the artificial State of Israel right smack down bang in the middle of a bunch of pissed orf Arabs.  And who could have not failed to predict how well that was going to work out....yeas, they'd be plonkers. Hey, Dukey, when are you going to tell us about that Muslim manisfesto?  When did that come into existence? "AUSSIE" is an anti Semite.  He probably has Nazi in his Ancestry. Godwin's Law.   ::)

Godwin's law (or Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies)[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazism or Hitler approaches 1"[2][3]—​​that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism.

Promulgated by American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990,[2] Godwin's law originally referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions.[4] It is now applied to any threaded online discussion, such as Internet forums, chat rooms, and comment threads, as well as to speeches, articles, and other rhetoric.

Of course. Well sighted. :D

1. We Are All Born Free & Equal. We are all born free. We all have our own thoughts and ideas. We should all be treated in the same way.

2. Don’t Discriminate. These rights belong to everybody, whatever our differences.

3. The Right to Life. We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety.

4. No Slavery. Nobody has any right to make us a slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.

5. No Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.

6. You Have Rights No Matter Where You Go. I am a person just like you!

7. We’re All Equal Before the Law. The law is the same for everyone. It must treat us all fairly.

8. Your Human Rights Are Protected by Law. We can all ask for the law to help us when we are not treated fairly.

9. No Unfair Detainment. Nobody has the right to put us in prison without good reason and keep us there, or to send us away from our country.

10. The Right to Trial. If we are put on trial this should be in public. The people who try us should not let anyone tell them what to do.

11. We’re Always Innocent Till Proven Guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show it is not true.

12. The Right to Privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name. Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters, or bother us or our family without a good reason.

13. Freedom to Move. We all have the right to go where we want in our own country and to travel as we wish.

14. The Right to Seek a Safe Place to Live. If we are frightened of being badly treated in our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be safe.

15. Right to a Nationality. We all have the right to belong to a country.



16. Marriage and Family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and have a family if they want to. Men and women have the same rights when they are married, and when they are separated.

17. The Right to Your Own Things. Everyone has the right to own things or share them. Nobody should take our things from us without a good reason.

18. Freedom of Thought. We all have the right to believe in what we want to believe, to have a religion, or to change it if we want.

19. Freedom of Expression. We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people.

20. The Right to Public Assembly. We all have the right to meet our friends and to work together in peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a group if we don’t want to.

21. The Right to Democracy. We all have the right to take part in the government of our country. Every grown-up should be allowed to choose their own leaders.

22. Social Security. We all have the right to affordable housing, medicine, education, and childcare, enough money to live on and medical help if we are ill or old.

23. Workers’ Rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to a fair wage for their work, and to join a trade union.

24. The Right to Play. We all have the right to rest from work and to relax.

25. Food and Shelter for All. We all have the right to a good life. Mothers and children, people who are old, unemployed or disabled, and all people have the right to be cared for.

26. The Right to Education. Education is a right. Primary school should be free. We should learn about the United Nations and how to get on with others. Our parents can choose what we learn.

27. Copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects one’s own artistic creations and writings; others cannot make copies without permission. We all have the right to our own way of life and to enjoy the good things that art, science and learning bring.

28. A Fair and Free World. There must be proper order so we can all enjoy rights and freedoms in our own country and all over the world.

29. Responsibility. We have a duty to other people, and we should protect their rights and freedoms.

30. No One Can Take Away Your Human Rights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb2Awn_dYTs

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:27pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 5:19pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 4:05pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:24pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:22pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:21pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 26th, 2016 at 10:14pm: No......I simply say that the State of Israel ought not be where we plonked it.  'Tasmania' is a metaphor which I guess went right over your head. And whys that?  You put a mongoose into a snake pit and what do you reckon is the likely outcome?  A love-in? Israel is not a mongoose because Israel has no interest in attacking Islamic countries.  It isn't the Jewish people who hate Muslims, it's the other way around. Really......what was that little glitch in 1967?  Have you ever read the comments of Mr Hicks about the neighbours of Israel? what glitch?  The arabs invaded and got their butts handed to them. The "Arabs" failed to cross the border of the modern State of Israel.  Hardly an invasion...   ::) Its the intent that counts, not whether they did or not. The preemptive strikes stopped them. Wrong.  There was no intent in 1956.  The 1956 was a war that was manufacture - conspired by Israel, the UK and France in order to try and grab back the Suez Canal from the Egyptian people.   This has been clearly laid out in all the history books written since then.   The Egyptians didn't even have batteries in their tanks - having removed them to charge them - when the Israelis attacked in a completely unprovoked manner.    ::)

So the guy who fought Israel in 1948, overthrew the King because of the failed war, and then tried again in 1967, but accordigly he was no threat?  The whole point is that Israel attacks for national  security because it's an area of people who hate israel.  Why? Fascism. Stop the hate and you stop the need for defensive strategy from Israel.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:25pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:14pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:53pm: These, Duke? Link. Oi....Dukey???????  Did you see this before you made a tit of yourself? My point is give the actually primary source.  You need to do better googling, sweetheart. ....and mine is to get an agreed list.

You disagreed with the un human rights charter? Which part?

Do you agree that the list of these rights you want to discuss is now set out in Post # 110 above?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:10pm:

Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:58pm: What about all the good things Hitler did? Such as?

Glad you asked
He cared about conditions for the Jews in the work camps

Unbeknown to billions of people the Nazi camps were not death camps, nor were they places to carry out human experiments. They were simply containment camps. Something had to be done with these destructive anti-social Jews who were strangling Germany. Thanks to the Jews, Germany had lost it’s moral code and had become debased and de-cultured, does that ring a bell?

Something had to be done! And Hitler did do something – he placed all the Jews in containment camps to allow Germany to breath again. But – this is the key point in this essay/piece. He did it in a way which was ethical. The camps had decent sufficient food (bearing in mind it was war time), they had theaters, swimming pools, football pitches, post offices where inmates could communicate to the outside world, kindergartens, art and music recreation and even prostitutes.

My theory is that if there had not have been a war effort, Hitler would not have even made the Jews work. AND I bet you the containment camps would have been luxury rehabilitation centers. In order to slowly de-programme the Jews from their mind control cult.

Hitler was NOT an atheist – despite what the Jewish propaganda machine wants us to believe. He often made references to God and spoke in terms of a Divinity. He was somebody who could clearly make the connection between Divine law and Natural laws. He was spiritually and morally driven throughout all his political career. Read his book Mein Kampf to see his consistent reference to Christian values

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:40pm:

Do you agree that the list of these rights you want to discuss is now set out in Post # 110 above?

I didn't read your post.  I agree with the un human rights charter as the agreed universal human rights.  Do you intend to waste anymore time with posting useless questions?

Its time wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:40pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:10pm: Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:58pm: What about all the good things Hitler did? Such as? Glad you asked He cared about conditions for the Jews in the work camps Unbeknown to billions of people the Nazi camps were not death camps, nor were they places to carry out human experiments. They were simply containment camps. Something had to be done with these destructive anti-social Jews who were strangling Germany. Thanks to the Jews, Germany had lost it’s moral code and had become debased and de-cultured, does that ring a bell? Something had to be done! And Hitler did do something – he placed all the Jews in containment camps to allow Germany to breath again. But – this is the key point in this essay/piece. He did it in a way which was ethical. The camps had decent sufficient food (bearing in mind it was war time), they had theaters, swimming pools, football pitches, post offices where inmates could communicate to the outside world, kindergartens, art and music recreation and even prostitutes. My theory is that if there had not have been a war effort, Hitler would not have even made the Jews work. AND I bet you the containment camps would have been luxury rehabilitation centers. In order to slowly de-programme the Jews from their mind control cult.

Look at the company you keep, Aussie.  He actually believes he has a theory ;).

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:50pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:40pm: Do you agree that the list of these rights you want to discuss is now set out in Post # 110 above? I didn't read your post.  I agree with the un human rights charter as the agreed universal human rights.  Do you intend to waste anymore time with posting useless questions?

That is the UN list.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:04pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:50pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:40pm: Do you agree that the list of these rights you want to discuss is now set out in Post # 110 above? I didn't read your post.  I agree with the un human rights charter as the agreed universal human rights.  Do you intend to waste anymore time with posting useless questions? That is the UN list.

So why waste a post copying it here and asking me to agree to it when I have 1) given the link and 2) said I agreed with it already?  Stop wasting time Aussie and get to your point, if you have one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk

Its time wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:13pm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk

Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot. 

Its time wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 9:40pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:10pm: Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 8:58pm: What about all the good things Hitler did? Such as? Glad you asked He cared about conditions for the Jews in the work camps Unbeknown to billions of people the Nazi camps were not death camps, nor were they places to carry out human experiments. They were simply containment camps. Something had to be done with these destructive anti-social Jews who were strangling Germany. Thanks to the Jews, Germany had lost it’s moral code and had become debased and de-cultured, does that ring a bell? Something had to be done! And Hitler did do something – he placed all the Jews in containment camps to allow Germany to breath again. But – this is the key point in this essay/piece. He did it in a way which was ethical. The camps had decent sufficient food (bearing in mind it was war time), they had theaters, swimming pools, football pitches, post offices where inmates could communicate to the outside world, kindergartens, art and music recreation and even prostitutes. My theory is that if there had not have been a war effort, Hitler would not have even made the Jews work. AND I bet you the containment camps would have been luxury rehabilitation centers. In order to slowly de-programme the Jews from their mind control cult.

? Wtf

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:15pm:

Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:13pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot.

An antisemitism who also lies.
He knows why.

Gordon wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:18pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:15pm: Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:13pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot.  An antisemitism who also lies. He knows why.

I'm afraid he actually believes his sh1t.  This is the problem with the regressive left, it's not even about their irrational views on the ideas of Islam, it's that they have always been like this. They actually believe hitler was not that bad, and the whole war was just another attempt to keep western imperialism.  They are nuts. Plain nuts.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:11pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:04pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:50pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:40pm: Do you agree that the list of these rights you want to discuss is now set out in Post # 110 above? I didn't read your post.  I agree with the un human rights charter as the agreed universal human rights.  Do you intend to waste anymore time with posting useless questions? That is the UN list. So why waste a post copying it here and asking me to agree to it when I have 1) given the link and 2) said I agreed with it already?  Stop wasting time Aussie and get to your point, if you have one.

The list of Universal Declaration of Human Rights that Arsie posted is not compatible with Islam, the Islamic apologists stick up for a religion that isn't compatible with human rights.

The Muslims have the Cairo Declaration of human rights, the last 2 articles show Sharia law trumps human rights.

The Caliphate have slavery, not compatible with UDHR, death for apostasy is a clear violation of article 18 of the UDHR, not much in the UDHR is compatible with Islam.

Perhaps Arsie and the other apologists should read the Islamic texts and see what they are defending.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:11pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:04pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:50pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:40pm: Do you agree that the list of these rights you want to discuss is now set out in Post # 110 above? I didn't read your post.  I agree with the un human rights charter as the agreed universal human rights.  Do you intend to waste anymore time with posting useless questions? That is the UN list. So why waste a post copying it here and asking me to agree to it when I have 1) given the link and 2) said I agreed with it already?  Stop wasting time Aussie and get to your point, if you have one.

You did not give a link.  You gave a description.  I posted the link. 

Anyway, before you concern yourself with other Sovereign States, how about you concentrate on the one you can influence directly.  How's Australia going on 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23 and 30?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:15pm:

Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:13pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot.

Quality sanitation within the camps was paramount and that is why the inmates clothes were regularly de-loused with Zyklon B gas. There were no human gas chambers……THAT IS A BIG FAT KOSHER LIE; to which the world has had to endure for over half a century.

Quote:

Perhaps Arsie and the other apologists should read the Islamic texts and see what they are defending.

The only thing I am defending is the sovereignty of other Nations to adopt Laws as they see fit, and if those Laws do not accord with a UN Charter, I guess they won't be Members of the UN.

If some Yank tried to tell me that Australians ought to adopt their 2nd Amendment, I'd tell him to mind his own bloody business.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:30pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:11pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:04pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:50pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 9:40pm: Do you agree that the list of these rights you want to discuss is now set out in Post # 110 above? I didn't read your post.  I agree with the un human rights charter as the agreed universal human rights.  Do you intend to waste anymore time with posting useless questions? That is the UN list. So why waste a post copying it here and asking me to agree to it when I have 1) given the link and 2) said I agreed with it already?  Stop wasting time Aussie and get to your point, if you have one. You did not give a link.  You gave a description.  I posted the link.  Anyway, before you concern yourself with other Sovereign States, how about you concentrate on the one you can influence directly.  How's Australia going on 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23 and 30?

I can't care about both cases?  Why can't I care about both?  Does Australia violating a human right trump the entire Middle East violation basically all human rights?  What a flawed argument.  So I shouldn't care about the abuse of women in the Middle East because we have women being beaten up and raped in Australia too?  So, women of the Middle East, you can not drive cars, you can get gang raped and then punished - Aussie is okay with this because he's too concerned that in Australia rape exists too. 

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:23pm:

Gordon wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:15pm: Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:13pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot.  An antisemitism who also lies. He knows why. I'm afraid he actually believes his sh1t.  This is the problem with the regressive left, it's not even about their irrational views on the ideas of Islam, it's that they have always been like this. They actually believe hitler was not that bad, and the whole war was just another attempt to keep western imperialism.  They are nuts. Plain nuts.

I've met old Jews who were in auschwitz.
Interesting when you search the text he posted it pops up in places like Stormfront, anarchists sites, truthers. He's no more than a nut job who doesn't even have  $1000 to his name.

Geebuz Duke, now you are getting hysterical.  Where did I say any of this?


Quote:

I can't care about both cases?  Why can't I care about both?  Does Australia violating a human right trump the entire Middle East violation basically all human rights?  What a flawed argument.  So I shouldn't care about the abuse of women in the Middle East because we have women being beaten up and raped in Australia too?  So, women of the Middle East, you can not drive cars, you can get gang raped and then punished - Aussie is okay with this because he's too concerned that in Australia rape exists too.

Naughty, Duke.  Verballing me with your burdens will not work, you know.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:36pm:

Quote: Perhaps Arsie and the other apologists should read the Islamic texts and see what they are defending. The only thing I am defending is the sovereignty of other Nations to adopt Laws as they see fit, and if those Laws do not accord with a UN Charter, I guess they won't be Members of the UN. If some Yank tried to tell me that Australians ought to adopt their 2nd Amendment, I'd tell him to mind his own bloody business.

and yet they are members, in fact some of them are on the human rights council ;D. 

Your argument works when we deal with democratic states, where people actually have a chance to have a say.  And sovereignty isn't the be it and all for law making. Laws should abide by set standards, such as a human rights charter. If they dont, I have no problem with criticising and I have no problem with enforcement.  We are talking about dictators and regimes that, according to all regressive leftists, aren't acting in the interest of their people.  Why are you against offering these peaceful people a hand in removing their regimes who deny them the say on what the laws should be?

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:36pm:

Quote: Perhaps Arsie and the other apologists should read the Islamic texts and see what they are defending. The only thing I am defending is the sovereignty of other Nations to adopt Laws as they see fit, and if those Laws do not accord with a UN Charter, I guess they won't be Members of the UN.

The UN appointed the Saudis to chair the human rights panel.

The Saudis behead atheists/homos/witches/blasphemers, they amputate hands from thieves and don't let women drive or have rights.

So why are the Saudis not only members of the UN but the chair on human rights?

Stick to driving taxis arsie you are out of your depth with anything else

Its time wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:34pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:15pm: Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:13pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot.  Quality sanitation within the camps was paramount and that is why the inmates clothes were regularly de-loused with Zyklon B gas. There were no human gas chambers……THAT IS A BIG FAT KOSHER LIE; to which the world has had to endure for over half a century.

Absolute codswallop. go stick your head in a bucket of water and hold your breath for 10 minutes for being a major  oxygen thief.

Its time wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:34pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:15pm: Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:13pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot.  Quality sanitation within the camps was paramount and that is why the inmates clothes were regularly de-loused with Zyklon B gas. There were no human gas chambers……THAT IS A BIG FAT KOSHER LIE; to which the world has had to endure for over half a century.

FFS put up the Link to where you are getting that stuff from (word for word) and that might assist.  I assume it is a satirical site.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:40pm:

Geebuz Duke, now you are getting hysterical.  Where did I say any of this? Quote: I can't care about both cases?  Why can't I care about both?  Does Australia violating a human right trump the entire Middle East violation basically all human rights?  What a flawed argument.  So I shouldn't care about the abuse of women in the Middle East because we have women being beaten up and raped in Australia too?  So, women of the Middle East, you can not drive cars, you can get gang raped and then punished - Aussie is okay with this because he's too concerned that in Australia rape exists too. Naughty, Duke.  Verballing me with your burdens will not work, you know.

It's implied by your suggesting that Australia should only care about itself.  Naughty, rascist Aussie - women being raped is okay as long as they aren't white ey? Women being raped is okay because a fascist regime has installed a law on its people and because they are "sovereign" we can't say anything.  Truly, your arguments are so blatantly dull and stupid it's quite amazing.

Gordon wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:39pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:23pm: Gordon wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:15pm: Its time wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:13pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICFNxrJeLVk Go away antisemite, you've shown us all that you're an idiot.  An antisemitism who also lies. He knows why. I'm afraid he actually believes his sh1t.  This is the problem with the regressive left, it's not even about their irrational views on the ideas of Islam, it's that they have always been like this. They actually believe hitler was not that bad, and the whole war was just another attempt to keep western imperialism.  They are nuts. Plain nuts. I've met old Jews who were in auschwitz. Interesting when you search the text he posted it pops up in places like Stormfront, anarchists sites, truthers. He's no more than a nut job who doesn't even have  $1000 to his name.

And the biggest problem is he actually thinks he represents liberalism.  No antisemite represents liberalism.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:43pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:40pm: Geebuz Duke, now you are getting hysterical.  Where did I say any of this? Quote: I can't care about both cases?  Why can't I care about both?  Does Australia violating a human right trump the entire Middle East violation basically all human rights?  What a flawed argument.  So I shouldn't care about the abuse of women in the Middle East because we have women being beaten up and raped in Australia too?  So, women of the Middle East, you can not drive cars, you can get gang raped and then punished - Aussie is okay with this because he's too concerned that in Australia rape exists too. Naughty, Duke.  Verballing me with your burdens will not work, you know. It's implied by your suggesting that Australia should only care about itself.  Naughty, rascist Aussie - women being raped is okay as long as they aren't white ey? Women being raped is okay because a fascist regime has installed a law on its people and because they are "sovereign" we can't say anything.  Truly, your arguments are so blatantly dull and stupid it's quite amazing.

Yet again, you are creating strawmen positions.

Say as much as you like.  It's the same as doing this:

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view6/3927153/pissing-in-the-wind-o.gif

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:50pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:43pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:40pm: Geebuz Duke, now you are getting hysterical.  Where did I say any of this? Quote: I can't care about both cases?  Why can't I care about both?  Does Australia violating a human right trump the entire Middle East violation basically all human rights?  What a flawed argument.  So I shouldn't care about the abuse of women in the Middle East because we have women being beaten up and raped in Australia too?  So, women of the Middle East, you can not drive cars, you can get gang raped and then punished - Aussie is okay with this because he's too concerned that in Australia rape exists too. Naughty, Duke.  Verballing me with your burdens will not work, you know. It's implied by your suggesting that Australia should only care about itself.  Naughty, rascist Aussie - women being raped is okay as long as they aren't white ey? Women being raped is okay because a fascist regime has installed a law on its people and because they are "sovereign" we can't say anything.  Truly, your arguments are so blatantly dull and stupid it's quite amazing. Yet again, you are creating strawmen positions. Say as much as you like.  It's the same as doing this: http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view6/3927153/pissing-in-the-wind-o.gif

How is it a strawman?  You said that i agreed with human rights I should concentrate my efforts on Australia rather than the Middle East because Australia also has violations.  I'm not disagreeing that Australia has violations, but I'm showing you the irrationality of your argument.   It isn't a strawman. You're just upset because you agree your statement was foolish.  Which is good, because it shows that you at least possess some common sense, it's just unfortunate you aren't man enough to admit your argument was wrong.

Quote:

How is it a strawman?

Because you are ascribing to me positions which are not mine.

You are constructing an argument (one which is not mine) and seeking that I debate it.  Nah.

Bed.

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:58pm:

Quote: How is it a strawman? Because you are ascribing to me positions which are not mine. You are constructing an argument (one which is not mine) and seeking that I debate it.  Nah. Bed.

It is blatantly your argument. You just realised it was what you were suggesting and are quickly trying to backtrack.  Just admit what you said was utterly foolish and we can move on.

Show me where I said this:


Quote:

women being raped is okay as long as they aren't white ey? Women being raped is okay because a fascist regime has installed a law on its people and because they are "sovereign" we can't say anything.

Then, we can move on.

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 2:39pm:

Show me where I said this: Quote: women being raped is okay as long as they aren't white ey? Women being raped is okay because a fascist regime has installed a law on its people and because they are "sovereign" we can't say anything. Then, we can move on.

When you listed all the human rights in the charter that we should focus on in Australia first before looking at the Middle East. Remember?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 4:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 2:39pm: Show me where I said this: Quote: women being raped is okay as long as they aren't white ey? Women being raped is okay because a fascist regime has installed a law on its people and because they are "sovereign" we can't say anything. Then, we can move on. When you listed all the human rights in the charter that we should focus on in Australia first before looking at the Middle East. Remember?

Did I mention 'rape,' or 'black,' or 'white?'  Yes or no.

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 4:26pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 4:24pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 2:39pm: Show me where I said this: Quote: women being raped is okay as long as they aren't white ey? Women being raped is okay because a fascist regime has installed a law on its people and because they are "sovereign" we can't say anything. Then, we can move on. When you listed all the human rights in the charter that we should focus on in Australia first before looking at the Middle East. Remember? Did I mention 'rape,' or 'black,' or 'white?'  Yes or no.

Arabia is for Arabs, Aussie, remember?  Let's worry about Australian human rights, remember?   Us and them. 

I'm glad you feel foolish about your implication.  Next time have a think about what you're saying.

So, I was right, you were constructing strawmen.  I feel 'foolish' about nothing.  That's yet another strawman of yours. 

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 5:24pm:

So, I was right, you were constructing strawmen.  I feel 'foolish' about nothing.  That's yet another strawman of yours.

Not at all. If you can't comprehend what you're implying with your constant "sovereign nation I can't criticise" and "Arabia for Arabs" and "worry about Australia" nonsense then that isn't my problem.  But by implication what you are saying is very simple: you don't care if a state flogs a woman for being raped as long as it isn't in Australia. Ie: human rights are only for white women in your books.

You are getting hysterical yet again!


Quote:

you don't care if a state flogs a woman for being raped as long as it isn't in Australia. Ie: human rights are only for white women in your books.

Yet more strawmen.  You are punching at shadows, Duke.

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 6:38pm:

You are getting hysterical yet again! Quote: you don't care if a state flogs a woman for being raped as long as it isn't in Australia. Ie: human rights are only for white women in your books. Yet more strawmen.  You are punching at shadows, Duke.

I'm not hysterical, I'm simply pointing out how ridiculous your line of argument is. 

So, now you do care about a state sanctioning the flogging of a woman for being raped? Now we should intervene? Yes? No? Which one is it, Aussie? Is Arabia not for Arabs?

Quote:

Now we should intervene? Yes? No?

Yes.

Whinge, wail, moan, groan, sing Kumbaya, flog yer back, jump off tall buildings, gnash yer teeth,  rip yer hair out, go into a foetal position...diplomacy.............do what you like.

Invade?

No.

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 6:51pm:

Quote: Now we should intervene? Yes? No? Yes. Whinge, wail, moan, groan, sing Kumbaya, flog yer back, jump off tall buildings, gnash yer teeth,  rip yer hair out, go into a foetal position...diplomacy.............do what you like. Invade? No.

To remove a murderous, genocidal dictator or a murderous regime - no problems.  All you pacifists are good for is singing kumbaya. When has that ever worked?

How did the invasion work out?

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 7:40pm:

How did the invasion work out?

Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 8:28pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing?

http://www.quotehd.com/imagequotes/authors53/tmb/michael-greenberger-quote-this-may-simply-be-rearranging-the-deck.jpg

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 8:28pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing?

Damned right it is.

Why?

Because it directly contributed to the power-vacuums and instability which have plagued the joint ever since.

Not to mention handing the extremists a gift-wrapped, gold-plated inscribed invitation to launch terror attacks
upon the West.

Sadass, ruthless and despotic as he was, at least kept that toilet-seat firmly nailed down.

It was the West which removed the nails, not the jihadists.

Kat wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 8:49pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:28pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing? Damned right it is. Why? Because it directly contributed to the power-vacuums and instability which have plagued the joint ever since. Not to mention handing the extremists a gift-wrapped, gold-plated inscribed invitation to launch terror attacks upon the West. Sadass, ruthless and despotic as he was, at least kept that toilet-seat firmly nailed down. It was the West which removed the nails, not the jihadists.

So your argument is in order to not have Islamic terrorism, Iraqis had to continue to die under sadam Hussein.

Great argument.  Rascist.

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 8:35pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:28pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing? http://www.quotehd.com/imagequotes/authors53/tmb/michael-greenberger-quote-this-may-simply-be-rearranging-the-deck.jpg

Because the allied forces were not allowed to finish the job.  Too many regressives became too upset at the removal of a Murderous dictator.

Who would have thunk it. Leftists are in support of despotism and repression.  I guess it goes with the mind set that favours government intervention and control and ceding individual will and enterprise. 

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 9:23pm:

Who would have thunk it. Leftists are in support of despotism and repression.  I guess it goes with the mind set that favours government intervention and control and ceding individual will and enterprise.

It boils down to a few things:

1. The regressive leftist is a pacifist who refuses to acknowledge that war should even be the last resort.  I think a very big candle is the last resort to them.  That's why apparently sadam Hussein should've remained, because at least he killed jihadists... Along with millions of innocent people.
2. The regressive leftist believes that a majority being critical of a minority can never occur because of past deeds.  Therefore they live with this idea of "Arabia for Arabs" and "it's cultural difference" and "let them sort it out". Meanwhile child girls are having babies with middle aged men, women are being killed for showing a bit of leg or for being raped, hands are being chopped off for stealing a bit of bread dictators have torture chambers, slavery builds massive skyscrapers, slavery cleans the streets and toilets, sex slaver pays off debts and pleases paedophiles, homosexuals fear for their lives, apostates fear for their lives, and antisemitism is so spread that one can't visit the Middle East if one bears a J :-?jewish surname.  But it's okay, "it's a different culture".  "Arabia for Arabs."
3. The regressive left doesn't actually believe in human rights for everyone: only for themselves.  That's why people like Aussie jumped through the roof with the torture stories out of NT, but torture stories out of the Middle East: "Arabia for Arabs".  This is fundamentally a rascist viewpoint.
4. The regressive left a hipocrites.  They want action from the west on Saudia Arabia, but apparently Saudia Arabia is the result of western interference.  They can't make up their mind on what they actually want.  us didn't interfere in Rwanda - BAD. The same genocide occurs in Iraq and US interferes: BAD.  Everything is the fault of the west and everything the west does is Bad.  Of course, this is fundamentally irrational, but then no one ever said regressive left were rational people ;)

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 9:10pm:

Kat wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:49pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:28pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing? Damned right it is. Why? Because it directly contributed to the power-vacuums and instability which have plagued the joint ever since. Not to mention handing the extremists a gift-wrapped, gold-plated inscribed invitation to launch terror attacks upon the West. Sadass, ruthless and despotic as he was, at least kept that toilet-seat firmly nailed down. It was the West which removed the nails, not the jihadists. So your argument is in order to not have Islamic terrorism, Iraqis had to continue to die under sadam Hussein. Great argument.  Rascist.

Not argument. Not opinion.

FACT.

Grow a brain.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 9:12pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:35pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:28pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing? http://www.quotehd.com/imagequotes/authors53/tmb/michael-greenberger-quote-this-may-simply-be-rearranging-the-deck.jpg Because the allied forces were not allowed to finish the job.  Too many regressives became too upset at the removal of a Murderous dictator.

Gee, did they leave some little rocks to be made into even littler rocks?  Was not  Saddam hung?

Are we on the same page of history here?

Nice work Aussie  ;)

Kat wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 10:28pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 9:10pm: Kat wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:49pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:28pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing? Damned right it is. Why? Because it directly contributed to the power-vacuums and instability which have plagued the joint ever since. Not to mention handing the extremists a gift-wrapped, gold-plated inscribed invitation to launch terror attacks upon the West. Sadass, ruthless and despotic as he was, at least kept that toilet-seat firmly nailed down. It was the West which removed the nails, not the jihadists. So your argument is in order to not have Islamic terrorism, Iraqis had to continue to die under sadam Hussein. Great argument.  Rascist. Not argument. Not opinion. FACT. Grow a brain.

Fact that millions must die under sadam in order to stop terrorism? Where's the logic in this?

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 10:48pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 9:12pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:35pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 8:28pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 7:40pm: How did the invasion work out? Sadam and his two sons aren't using their hobby torture chamber anymore.  Is that a bad thing? http://www.quotehd.com/imagequotes/authors53/tmb/michael-greenberger-quote-this-may-simply-be-rearranging-the-deck.jpg Because the allied forces were not allowed to finish the job.  Too many regressives became too upset at the removal of a Murderous dictator. Gee, did they leave some little rocks to be made into even littler rocks?  Was not  Saddam hung? Are we on the same page of history here?

They left the country destabilised because the regressives didn't even support any action post the invasion.  They were still too busy crying that sadam got removed.  Like Kat, who's obviously still quite upset about it.

Quote:

They left the country destabilised because the regressives didn't even support any action post the invasion.

Gee.  "The Left."  And here I was thinking that the USA (not the 'Left') invaded and departed, and then much later Saddam was hung.  I guess we are not on the same Planet. 


Quote:

They were still too busy crying that sadam got removed.

Rubbish....just ....... mush.  No-one is crying that he was removed.  Fact is he was, and what you are asked is.......how did that work out?

Aussie wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 11:28pm:

Quote: They left the country destabilised because the regressives didn't even support any action post the invasion. Gee.  "The Left."  And here I was thinking that the USA (not the 'Left') invaded and departed, and then much later Saddam was hung.  I guess we are not on the same Planet.  [quote]They were still too busy crying that sadam got removed.

Rubbish....just ....... mush.  No-one is crying that he was removed.  Fact is he was, and what you are asked is.......how did that work out?[/quote]

Well, Kat is definitely crying. Look at him, apparently his freedoms are in danger because sadam Hussein is dead.  Kats freedoms depend on Iraqi suffering, apparently.

And yes, allied forces invaded, for the wrong reasons, but with the right outcome.  But we all know that everything is a game of politics, and rather than try and help establish a stabilised country in Iraq, the regressives spent all their time whining over sadam Hussein dying, as Kat is now, and blaming everything on the west. So when public support is completely diminished to nothing, what do you think happens in politics? Do politicians aim to keep troops in the country to solve the issues, at a cost to their seat, or do they do as the regressives demanded, and leave Iraq as a hell whole?  Given the amount of nonsense the regressives are still causing Blair id say we all know the answer to that one.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 29^th, 2016 at 12:02am:

Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 11:28pm: Quote: They left the country destabilised because the regressives didn't even support any action post the invasion. Gee.  "The Left."  And here I was thinking that the USA (not the 'Left') invaded and departed, and then much later Saddam was hung.  I guess we are not on the same Planet.  [quote]They were still too busy crying that sadam got removed. Rubbish....just ....... mush.  No-one is crying that he was removed.  Fact is he was, and what you are asked is.......how did that work out?

Well, Kat is definitely crying. Look at him, apparently his freedoms are in danger because sadam Hussein is dead.  Kats freedoms depend on Iraqi suffering, apparently.

And yes, allied forces invaded, for the wrong reasons, but with the right outcome.  But we all know that everything is a game of politics, and rather than try and help establish a stabilised country in Iraq, the regressives spent all their time whining over sadam Hussein dying, as Kat is now, and blaming everything on the west. So when public support is completely diminished to nothing, what do you think happens in politics? Do politicians aim to keep troops in the country to solve the issues, at a cost to their seat, or do they do as the regressives demanded, and leave Iraq as a hell whole?  Given the amount of nonsense the regressives are still causing Blair id say we all know the answer to that one.[/quote]

The Left 'regressive'????

DO wake up.

It's not the Left who are trying to drag the world back to the days of the Crusades.

You're thinking of the Western 'Right' who are, as always, terribly and blunderingly wrong.

The blame-inversion facilities of the average rightard are truly astounding.

Kat wrote on Jul 29^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 29th, 2016 at 12:02am: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 11:28pm: Quote: They left the country destabilised because the regressives didn't even support any action post the invasion. Gee.  "The Left."  And here I was thinking that the USA (not the 'Left') invaded and departed, and then much later Saddam was hung.  I guess we are not on the same Planet.  [quote]They were still too busy crying that sadam got removed. Rubbish....just ....... mush.  No-one is crying that he was removed.  Fact is he was, and what you are asked is.......how did that work out? Well, Kat is definitely crying. Look at him, apparently his freedoms are in danger because sadam Hussein is dead.  Kats freedoms depend on Iraqi suffering, apparently. And yes, allied forces invaded, for the wrong reasons, but with the right outcome.  But we all know that everything is a game of politics, and rather than try and help establish a stabilised country in Iraq, the regressives spent all their time whining over sadam Hussein dying, as Kat is now, and blaming everything on the west. So when public support is completely diminished to nothing, what do you think happens in politics? Do politicians aim to keep troops in the country to solve the issues, at a cost to their seat, or do they do as the regressives demanded, and leave Iraq as a hell whole?  Given the amount of nonsense the regressives are still causing Blair id say we all know the answer to that one.

The Left 'regressive'????

DO wake up.

It's not the Left who are trying to drag the world back to the days of the Crusades.

You're thinking of the Western 'Right' who are, as always, terribly and blunderingly wrong.

The blame-inversion facilities of the average rightard are truly astounding.[/quote]


And yet you're the one who just told us how good sadam was.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 29^th, 2016 at 5:20pm:

Kat wrote on Jul 29th, 2016 at 2:50pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jul 29th, 2016 at 12:02am: Aussie wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 11:28pm: Quote: They left the country destabilised because the regressives didn't even support any action post the invasion. Gee.  "The Left."  And here I was thinking that the USA (not the 'Left') invaded and departed, and then much later Saddam was hung.  I guess we are not on the same Planet.  [quote]They were still too busy crying that sadam got removed. Rubbish....just ....... mush.  No-one is crying that he was removed.  Fact is he was, and what you are asked is.......how did that work out? Well, Kat is definitely crying. Look at him, apparently his freedoms are in danger because sadam Hussein is dead.  Kats freedoms depend on Iraqi suffering, apparently. And yes, allied forces invaded, for the wrong reasons, but with the right outcome.  But we all know that everything is a game of politics, and rather than try and help establish a stabilised country in Iraq, the regressives spent all their time whining over sadam Hussein dying, as Kat is now, and blaming everything on the west. So when public support is completely diminished to nothing, what do you think happens in politics? Do politicians aim to keep troops in the country to solve the issues, at a cost to their seat, or do they do as the regressives demanded, and leave Iraq as a hell whole?  Given the amount of nonsense the regressives are still causing Blair id say we all know the answer to that one. The Left 'regressive'???? DO wake up. It's not the Left who are trying to drag the world back to the days of the Crusades. You're thinking of the Western 'Right' who are, as always, terribly and blunderingly wrong. The blame-inversion facilities of the average rightard are truly astounding.

And yet you're the one who just told us how good sadam was.[/quote]

I did nothing of the sort.

You really do need to brush-up on your comprehension skills.