Making Baby Jesus Cry

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Sweeds, Norwegians, Nordic socialist bastards, right? Thanks for the correction.

You don't think that Carter has done good things on a humanitarian basis since his presidency ended? I remember you seriously advocating Bono a few years back, and I agree that his work has been apparently self-less and good. I sort of think that Carter has redeemed his rather bad presidency with his subsequent private good looks, the lust in his heart notwithstanding.

And Carter didn't get an invite to the Pope funeral, so they're even now, I guess.

Le Duc Tho of North Vietnam wasn't a very good choice either.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
It's important to read translations of his speechs made in arabic, rather than listen to his speechs made in English. Most concillatory speeches were made in English. Most tof the people who understood them live in the US or Europe, not the Middle East.

2.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Man, you have low standards.

Sorry, Balt.

It's the southern thing.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by baltassoc
you ignorant bigot.

That is my line. But we will let you use it because you have the second best Avatar on the boards.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Which is my point. Pulling out a bunch of (undated) quotes may not be particularly insightful into the current attitudes of a leader. Especially a dead one.

In other words, you could try to find a more incisive, less repetitive, and even funny way to make your point.

The current leadership is essentially the same as the past, i.e. the dead guy. No dissent was brooked. There is a unity of thought as to the ultimate goal. the only difference of opinion that I can ascertain is how quickly they want to push to get there.

As for for the way I made my point, I think it is incisive. There are the words of the popular Palestinian leadership to compare and contrast with the words of moderation, acceptance and tolerance of some people here and in the political leadership in various nations worldwide. Also to compare and contrast with what would be an ideal standard for any peace prize, let alone what some would consider the international standard. What clearer way to make the point? the words are relatively concise and to the point. Clear in their meaning and effect. The repetitiveness shows that there is no mistake. The sentiments were not an off handed remark, misconstrued by the press. there are decades of such quotes of Arafat and other palestinian leaders. The plan noted in one of the quotes to destroy Israel was promulgated in 1974. It remains the official policy of Fatah today.

As for whether or not its funny, it was not meant to be. I have lived the whole of my life being able to observe Arafat. I, like probably you, remember watching the 72 Olympics, live. This was a guy who was a violent terrorist for the whole of my existence, and yet, he is legitimized and lauded in certain circles. I don't think its funny, I think its fucking sad. Especially when you consider that when he took the leadership of the PLO only 20 some odd years had passed since the Holocaust. For 40 years after that this guy to various degrees was treated as a legitimate world leader. And yet there is massive written record out there that he was a rabid jew-hater and in favour of genocide of the Israeli people. To me there is disconnect here and maybe we need to examine why, repetively, why, before we let it happen again.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
That is my line. But we will let you use it because you have the second best Avatar on the boards.

thanks, I didn't realize you liked mine that much.

[Spanky]

"You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism," Sheehan declares.

Reminds me of a bumper sticker that read "U.S. out out of North Dakota".

However, brings up an interesting point. If all the Jews left Palestine and all US forces left the middle east would there still be terrorism?

I think there would be I just thought I would ask the question.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
"You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism," Sheehan declares.

Reminds me of a bumper sticker that read "U.S. out out of North Dakota".

However, brings up an interesting point. If all the Jews left Palestine and all US forces left the middle east would there still be terrorism?

I think there would be I just thought I would ask the question.

Of course there would be. The Koran makes very clear what the ultimate goal is. The resurrection of the Caliphate is not going to be acheived at the ballot box. At least not in the US.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Of course there would be. The Koran makes very clear what the ultimate goal is. The resurrection of the Caliphate is not going to be acheived at the ballot box. At least not in the US.

There are four main reasons why Islam will never catch in the US.

1) No Alcohol

2) Praying five times a day (and that means standing and kneeling like ten times every time you pray)-American are way to lazy.

3) Ramadan - Americans are not going to fast for a month even if it is only for daylight hours.

4) No pork - it would cause another civil war.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
The current leadership is essentially the same as the past, i.e. the dead guy. No dissent was brooked. There is a unity of thought as to the ultimate goal. the only difference of opinion that I can ascertain is how quickly they want to push to get there.

As for for the way I made my point, I think it is incisive. There are the words of the popular Palestinian leadership to compare and contrast with the words of moderation, acceptance and tolerance of some people here and in the political leadership in various nations worldwide. Also to compare and contrast with what would be an ideal standard for any peace prize, let alone what some would consider the international standard. What clearer way to make the point? the words are relatively concise and to the point. Clear in their meaning and effect. The repetitiveness shows that there is no mistake. The sentiments were not an off handed remark, misconstrued by the press. there are decades of such quotes of Arafat and other palestinian leaders. The plan noted in one of the quotes to destroy Israel was promulgated in 1974. It remains the official policy of Fatah today.

As for whether or not its funny, it was not meant to be. I have lived the whole of my life being able to observe Arafat. I, like probably you, remember watching the 72 Olympics, live. This was a guy who was a violent terrorist for the whole of my existence, and yet, he is legitimized and lauded in certain circles. I don't think its funny, I think its fucking sad. Especially when you consider that when he took the leadership of the PLO only 20 some odd years had passed since the Holocaust. For 40 years after that this guy to various degrees was treated as a legitimate world leader. And yet there is massive written record out there that he was a rabid jew-hater and in favour of genocide of the Israeli people. To me there is disconnect here and maybe we need to examine why, repetively, why, before we let it happen again.

See? That was well stated, thoughtful, showed passion, some insight.... and wasn't just the same photos or the never-ending string of quotes that you continually rely on.

I'm on your side, Penske -- I think you can achieve more, preferably with less (not Less).

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
There are four main reasons why Islam will never catch in the US.

1) No Alcohol

2) Praying five times a day (and that means standing and kneeling like ten times every time you pray)-American are way to lazy.

3) Ramadan - Americans are not going to fast for a month even if it is only for daylight hours.

4) No pork - it would cause another civil war.

Yes, but those are 4 main reasons why Islam will never catch in the US voluntarily and/or at the ballot box. there are other ways to achieve the goal Spank.

FWIW, I no eatta the pig out of deference to my muslim friends. Or the cow out of deference to my hindu friends.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Spanky
4) No pork - it would cause another civil war.

That was my line, but I said it in a way that made on the libs hee realize just how much teeth such a rule would have.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
FWIW, I no eatta the pig out of deference to my muslim friends. Or the cow out of deference to my hindu friends.

or pussy in deference to PLF?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
or pussy in deference to PLF?

It used to be out of deference to Fringey, but now that our paths have diverged, yes, PLF.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
It used to be out of deference to Fringey, but now that our paths have diverged, yes, PLF.

You've spent a whole half day not posting photo-shops, and where did it get you? respected? No.

If anything the anti-Penske rabble rhetoric is even more shrill, if that's possible. i say go back to your first love.