07 Jan 04
Originally posted by kirksey957Bah, they're like kittens now. They wouldn't even invade Poland with me, and when have you known a German not to invade Poland, given the chance?
Well, for starters you just got back from Europe, the land of appeasing socialists. What have you got to say for yourself about that? Huh?!
07 Jan 04
2 edits
Originally posted by bbarrIt is not enough because there are totally brain dead cretins who you would call 'Texas severely mentally retarded' who have no right to live. They are killers. Mean, vicious, brutal... you get the picture.So what if they are democrats?(brain dead) They need to be put into a state 'dead' where they can kill nobody else.
I think moral wrongs exist. I think people can be wanton, shallow, insensitive to the suffering of others, etc. Why is this not enough? What more is there to evil than this? The problem I have with using the term 'evil' is that when peo ...[text shortened]... our razor wit upon me. I originally posted just to wish you well.
Cluster bombs. Bennett... if you know anything about the word 'cluster' that doesn't involve group sex... i'll eat my damned computer. It's easy to say that we "Cluster Bombed". Coming from a left wing apologizer like you, it has no real meaning. That is another reason you might want to reconsider your politics. The other reason being that (leaving) childhood should bring an ability to use logic.
As for my 'razor wit'... it is only old age grumpiness. I get so tired of people apologizing for mass murder... as you do when you oppose Bush, that I want to scream. Bush is an ass-ole. So? Mass murderers are deserving of anything besides death? Why?
07 Jan 04
Originally posted by UncleAdamYeah Rob, why are you trying to obscure the issue by bringing up our history? I bet if you had your way, our foreign policy decisions would be informed by our past mistakes. Any simpleton knows that our foreign policy decisions ought solely be based upon the presence or absence of evil.
What does a Ledger book have to do with anything anyway?
07 Jan 04
Originally posted by bbarrBennet... If you are up on history... Which US president opened the schools from segregation in Arkansas (fighting Democrats with troops)in compliance with US Law?
Yeah Rob, why are you trying to obscure the issue by bringing up our history? I bet if you had your way, our foreign policy decisions would be informed by our past mistakes. Any simpleton knows that our foreign policy decisions ought solely be based upon the presence or absence of evil.
Again you prove my point. You wouldn't know evil if it bit you in the butt. You would think it was purely part of the 'cluster'... whatever.
07 Jan 04
Originally posted by ianpickering
Many MPs hate the use of 'spin' and news management and blame him.
Is not spin and news management the core of politics?
He does get hammered for that at the dispatch box I've noticed but he handles it well.
You are right that Blair is straying from the core of the labour party's base ideology, but my understanding is that is what h ...[text shortened]... cans voting won't care if it's him or anyone else, as long as the ideology that is being followed.
07 Jan 04
Originally posted by StarValleyWyThis was taken from a recent article by Human Rights Watch:
It is not enough because there are totally brain dead cretins who you would call 'Texas severely mentally retarded' who have no right to live. They are killers. Mean, vicious, brutal... you get the picture.So what if they are democrats?(brain dead) They need to be put into a state 'dead' where they can kill nobody else.
Cluster bombs. Bennett... ...[text shortened]... . Bush is an ass-ole. So? Mass murderers are deserving of anything besides death? Why?
"The use of cluster munitions in populated areas caused more civilian casualties than any other factor in the coalition´s conduct of major military operations in March and April, Human Rights Watch said. U.S. and British forces used almost 13,000 cluster munitions, containing nearly 2 million submunitions, that killed or wounded more than 1,000 civilians.
Meanwhile, 50 strikes on top Iraqi leaders failed to kill any of the intended targets, but instead killed dozens of civilians, the Human Rights Watch report revealed. The U.S. “decapitation” strategy relied on intercepts of senior Iraqi leaders´ satellite phone calls along with corroborating intelligence that proved inadequate. As a result, the U.S. military could only locate targets within a 100-meter radius – clearly inadequate precision in civilian neighborhoods.
“Coalition forces generally tried to avoid killing Iraqis who weren´t taking part in combat,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “But the deaths of hundreds of civilians still could have been prevented.”"
You can read the whole report on their website. I have read this report, which means, apparently, that I know more about both cluster bombs and orgies than you.
I don't see how you could possibly infer from what I've posted that I think mass murder is O.K. I think it is a moral wrong (duh), but the presence of a mass murderer doesn't justify, for instance, the use of cluster bombs. This only adds injury to injury. Alleged mass murderers deserve a fair trial, just like any other alleged criminal. Convicted mass murderers ought to be punished. In Saddam Hussein's case, death seems the only suitable punishment. On that, at least, we agree.
07 Jan 04
Originally posted by StarValleyWyEisenhower sent the National Guard in the mid 50's, correct? Anyway, I know a moral wrong when I see it, though I'm still waiting for you to tell me what distinquishes an evil act from one that is merely morally wrong, wanton, cruel, etc.
Bennet... If you are up on history... Which US president opened the schools from segregation in Arkansas (fighting Democrats with troops)in compliance with US Law?
Again you prove my point. You wouldn't know evil if it bit you in the butt. You would think it was purely part of the 'cluster'... whatever.
07 Jan 04
Originally posted by bbarrCute again. You quote a Commie source. Am I supposed to actually read their propaganda like you do? Who founded Human Rights Watch? Do you know? I do. Commies. Worn out, but commies. It is easy for people to trace their roots. Commies. So?
This was taken from a recent article by Human Rights Watch:
"The use of cluster munitions in populated areas caused more civilian casualties than any other factor in the coalition´s conduct of major military operations in March and April, Human Rights Watch said. U.S. and British forces used almost 13,000 cluster munitions, containing nearly 2 million subm ...[text shortened]... addam Hussein's case, death seems the only suitable punishment. On that, at least, we agree.
Is that the best you can do? Silly, unsubstantiated... lying propaganda? Bennet! Come on... you can do better. Can't you?
By the way... once people research this issue and see that these are truely just worn out commies... Why are you supporting them?
07 Jan 04
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrAn evil act is one like you perpetrate. You have full knowledge of 'moral correctness' and choose to support 'continued chaos'. See supporting Saddaam.
Eisenhower sent the National Guard in the mid 50's, correct? Anyway, I know a moral wrong when I see it, though I'm still waiting for you to tell me what distinquishes an evil act from one that is merely morally wrong, wanton, cruel, etc.
Your phrase "One that is merely 'Morally wrong, wanton, cruel etc.' " is in your head and the heads of all who want to corrupt civilization, ie, eggheads with no clue of being human. The rest of us know 'evil' as those who support Saddaam Hussein. Simple. No? Simple, Yes. You really get a kick out of his multi-million murders, don't you.
Evil is hurting a fellow being.'Morally wrong, wanton and cruel' IS 'evil'. Bet you never considered that, did you? So much for the great religion of educational ineptitude.
07 Jan 04
Originally posted by StarValleyWyHuman Rights Watch was originally Helsinki Watch, a group founded to monitor the Soviet's compliance with the Helsinki accords. The group was actually founded by Russian activists opposed to the Soviet Union's brutal domestic and foreign policies. You can now take your foot out of your mouth.
Cute again. You quote a Commie source. Am I supposed to actually read their propaganda like you do? Who founded Human Rights Watch? Do you know? I do. Commies. Worn out, but commies. It is easy for people to trace their roots. Commies. So?
Is that the best you can do? Silly, unsubstantiated... lying propaganda? Bennet! Come on... you can do better. C ...[text shortened]... issue and see that these are truely just worn out commies... Why are you supporting them?
07 Jan 04
2 edits
Originally posted by bbarrNo. Because it was taken over and is now run by who? Speaking of worn out Commies.
Human Rights Watch was originally Helsinki Watch, a group founded to monitor the Soviet's compliance with the Helsinki accords. The group was actually founded by Russian activists opposed to the Soviet Union's brutal domestic and foreign policies. You can now take your foot out of your mouth.
ps... love your use of "originally". Very adroit. Or if you hate France... very 'cunning'.
By the way... If you build cars and your quality is the last thing you consider... implement an advert saying "Quality Is Job One"... If your appliances fall apart faster than you build them... (Maytag) build an avert campaign showing "maytag repairmen bored for lack of work". If you want to dominate and control all human rights activity on the planet... and kill millions with your secret police ... then call yourself "Human Rights Watch".