Time to stop the open funding of terrorism!

[GenuineRisk]

And here's something lovely (not)-- this is from andrewsullivan's website (he's a conservative blogger I like to read). A letter writer to him posted it. "USG" is United States Government, of course:

"On your most recent posting quoting about how the USG is bankrupt, and cannot pay its "creditors". I think they have figured out one way to take care of it: charge their citizens for emergency services.

I am currently enrolled in an intensive summer arabic program at the American University in Beirut, and am holed up at the university, probably the safest place in the city right now. Basically my choices have been to make a run for the border with Syria and try to catch a flight out, or wait for the USG to carry out the evacuation plan. Because I heard reports about the dangers of the former (and based on a statement by the American embassy), I opted for the latter. They are finally getting everything together today, but they dropped a little surprise: they are going to be billing us for giving us emergency transport to Cyprus, and then basically dropping us off on our own to get commercial flights back to the US. Most other goverrnments evacuating people here are actually flying them back to their home country without cost. But not the USG. They are perfectly happy to fund the World Toilet Summit (in Ireland, if my memory is correct) to the tune of $13 million or something. But 25,000 or so Americans stranded in the middle of a (quite unexpected) war zone? They better be ready to pay up if they want out."

Great. Just great. But by God, the wealthy DESERVE those tax cuts!

[Downthestretch55]

Genuine Risk,
I've stayed away from posting on this thread.
It was actually a bit "entertaining" to watch Pgardn and Bold Fraud go at it.

However, I have seen enough. The family that was driving north to the border that got hit, and the father of the eight children, who said "Oh God!
How can I tell my children? They are all so badly burned that I can't recognize them."
At least the Americans have a way out, even if they have to pay for it.
Unfortunately, the stupidity of present actions is only going to cause more resentment and retaliation. Do the "Powers that be" expect anything less?
Is this part of the plan to create even more "terrorists"?

Expect Bold A-hole to respond to this. He usually does, even brings his Townhall propaganda garbage. However, I am addressing this to YOU, not Bold A-hole. Let him start his own thread if he feels that what he has to say is SO VERY important.
Here's something that you might want to read to see the differences between the ways that the unfortunate victims of the carnage are attempting to escape.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0717-04.htm

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Genuine Risk,
I've stayed away from posting on this thread.
It was actually a bit "entertaining" to watch Pgardn and Bold Fraud go at it.

However, I have seen enough. The family that was driving north to the border that got hit, and the father of the eight children, who said "Oh God!
How can I tell my children? They are all so badly burned that I can't recognize them."
At least the Americans have a way out, even if they have to pay for it.
Unfortunately, the stupidity of present actions is only going to cause more resentment and retaliation. Do the "Powers that be" expect anything less?
Is this part of the plan to create even more "terrorists"?

Expect Bold A-hole to respond to this. He usually does, even brings his Townhall propaganda garbage. However, I am addressing this to YOU, not Bold A-hole. Let him start his own thread if he feels that what he has to say is SO VERY important.
Here's something that you might want to read to see the differences between the ways that the unfortunate victims of the carnage are attempting to escape.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0717-04.htm

Well, you don't have to wait for BB...I'll respond. I wish we had weapons with intelligence so that only the enemy was hit, the US conducted the most "humane" war (talk about an oximoron) in history when we invaded Iraq...every effort was made to limit civilian casualties, yet there were many horror stories like the ones in the article...IT SIMPLY ISN'T POSSIBLE to wage war and not kill folks, and the innocent die just like the guilty! It's still all smoke and mirrors, attempting to blame the Israeli people for defending their country against the savages attacking them...won't work!!! Tell a million horror stories, that fact will always remain!

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Well, you don't have to wait for BB...I'll respond. I wish we had weapons with intelligence so that only the enemy was hit, the US conducted the most "humane" war (talk about an oximoron) in history when we invaded Iraq...every effort was made to limit civilian casualties, yet there were many horror stories like the ones in the article...IT SIMPLY ISN'T POSSIBLE to wage war and not kill folks, and the innocent die just like the guilty! It's still all smoke and mirrors, attempting to blame the Israeli people for defending their country against the savages attacking them...won't work!!! Tell a million horror stories, that fact will always remain!

Somer,
This is always interesting. Smoke and mirrors, indeed!
Recent reports from Afghanistan show that the Taliban has regained control of two districts, opium crop (remember the "war on drugs"?) is bumper.
Iraq is going down in flames of civil war.
Now this overly aggressive response by Israel to the kidnapping of two soldiers.
Horror stories??? Far too many.
"Humane war"???

Never happened yet.

The innocents suffer for the mistakes of others.
Same old, same old.

Question: Do you honestly think that our present leadership will in anyway influence the current outcomes?

I'm interested in your take on this... and btw, those rockets aren't manufactured in Iran. They come from China. Can I buy some at Walmart?
Oh! I almost forgot to mention who holds the notes on the US deficit...you know who, don't you?

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Somer,
This is always interesting. Smoke and mirrors, indeed!
Recent reports from Afghanistan show that the Taliban has regained control of two districts, opium crop (remember the "war on drugs"?) is bumper.
Iraq is going down in flames of civil war.
Now this overly aggressive response by Israel to the kidnapping of two soldiers.
Horror stories??? Far too many.
"Humane war"???

Never happened yet.

The innocents suffer for the mistakes of others.
Same old, same old.

Question: Do you honestly think that our present leadership will in anyway influence the current outcomes?

I'm interested in your take on this... and btw, those rockets aren't manufactured in Iran. They come from China. Can I buy some at Walmart?
Oh! I almost forgot to mention who holds the notes on the US deficit...you know who, don't you?

Still all smoke and mirrors...makes for entertaining reading but doesn't have much to do with the Israeli reality...the people of Israel have a right to defend themselves...as I often quote in other circumstances, "in the end, we have only those rights which we can defend...only those rights!" The Garden of Eden doesn't exist...never did! There are no perfect solutions, no fairytale endings...no place on earth without evil lurking...has nothing to do with the situation at hand! Folks make decisions, both good and bad...if you choose to allow pigs in your house, it will smell like pig crap! Support terrorism and you can't complain when an Israeli missile comes through the kitchen window...you may feel you've been wronged and perhaps you have...but you'll still be scattered over the countryside.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

this is from andrewsullivan's website (he's a conservative blogger I like to read).

For the record: Andrew Sullivan is a leftist former New York Times reporter ... who is also openly homosexual and a crusader for homosexual rights.

Not that there's anything wrong with that ...

... but let's just keep the facts straight.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

For the record: Andrew Sullivan is a leftist former New York Times reporter ... who is also openly homosexual and a crusader for homosexual rights.

Not that there's anything wrong with that ...

... but let's just keep the facts straight.

What in the world does a man's sexual orientation have to do with what he thinks about taxes, governmental authority and states' rights? Oh, right, to the Republicans, EVERYTHING. Oy.

What do you consider a "leftist?" I also can't find any corroboration to him having been a reporter for the NYTimes. What years did he work there? Please give me the dates, along with a list of what you consider to be "leftist" attributes.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

What in the world does a man's sexual orientation have to do with what he thinks about taxes, governmental authority and states' rights? Oh, right, to the Republicans, EVERYTHING. Oy.

What do you consider a "leftist?" I also can't find any corroboration to him having been a reporter for the NYTimes. What years did he work there? Please give me the dates, along with a list of what you consider to be "leftist" attributes.

Sullivan was ... and perhaps still is ... a writer/reporter for the New York Times Magazine and the New York Times Book Review.

As I clearly stated ... his sexual practices have nothing to do with his primarily leftist political beliefs ... but he trumpets them wherever his work appears ... so they are relevant when discussing his background as a writer and analyst.

In any case ... Andrew is not a "conservative" or "right-winger."

None of which is relevant to the main question of what your point was in providing that unverifiable, unattributed anecdote.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Sullivan was ... and perhaps still is ... a writer/reporter for the New York Times Magazine and the New York Times Book Review.

As I clearly stated ... his sexual practices have nothing to do with his primarily leftist political beliefs ... but he trumpets them wherever his work appears ... so they are relevant when discussing his background as a writer and analyst.

In any case ... Andrew is not a "conservative" or "right-winger."

None of which is relevant to the main question of what your point was in providing that unverifiable, unattributed anecdote.

What are Sullivan's most recent articles for the Times Magazine and the Book Review? I think you have the NEW YORK Times confused with the LONDON Times. The NEW YORK Times, you see, publishes in New York. The LONDON Times publishes in LONDON. Sullivan is a regular contributer to the LONDON Times. But I can see how you'd get them confused-- New York... London... what's the difference, really?

Still awaiting your list of what you think are lefty platforms.

[GenuineRisk]

It's not justification for what is going on, but here is a blogger post from a student in Beirut about the support for Hezbollah and maybe some of the reasons why:

Date: 2006-07-18 13:33
Subject: Some insight, perhaps
Security: Public

It occured to me that a lot of people may have no idea why the Shia in the south support the HA so strongly.
The HA, being far from stupid, spent years being the benefactors of the population of the south that was otherwise largely cut off from the rest of the country. They built homes for them, organised schooling, hospitalised the needy, brought them spiritual support... At the same time, the only thing those simple people (way too illiterate and monolinguistic to have access to many sources of information) ever saw from Israel were bombs falling on their heads and events such as the Qana massacre (for the unaware – a UN compound of the Fijian detachment full of Shia refugees was targeted and bombed some years ago, making the entire world reel).

So exactly how do we explain to these people that the HA who fed, treated, schooled and sheltered them are the bad guys, and that Israel is not evil incarnate? As you can see, they've been told being bombed makes them heroes – and they believe it.

Brainwash is the new Black Plague.
62 comments | post a comment


The link to the blog is: http://cedarseed.livejournal.com/

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

It's not justification for what is going on, but here is a blogger post from a student in Beirut about the support for Hezbollah and maybe some of the reasons why:

Date: 2006-07-18 13:33
Subject: Some insight, perhaps
Security: Public

It occured to me that a lot of people may have no idea why the Shia in the south support the HA so strongly.
The HA, being far from stupid, spent years being the benefactors of the population of the south that was otherwise largely cut off from the rest of the country. They built homes for them, organised schooling, hospitalised the needy, brought them spiritual support... At the same time, the only thing those simple people (way too illiterate and monolinguistic to have access to many sources of information) ever saw from Israel were bombs falling on their heads and events such as the Qana massacre (for the unaware – a UN compound of the Fijian detachment full of Shia refugees was targeted and bombed some years ago, making the entire world reel).

So exactly how do we explain to these people that the HA who fed, treated, schooled and sheltered them are the bad guys, and that Israel is not evil incarnate? As you can see, they've been told being bombed makes them heroes – and they believe it.

Brainwash is the new Black Plague.
62 comments | post a comment


The link to the blog is: http://cedarseed.livejournal.com/

Ho-hum ... another unverifiable, unidentified, undocumented bit of "Did you know that Hitler built the autobahns and fed stray dogs" terrorist propaganda.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

What are Sullivan's most recent articles for the Times Magazine and the Book Review? I think you have the NEW YORK Times confused with the LONDON Times. The NEW YORK Times, you see, publishes in New York. The LONDON Times publishes in LONDON. Sullivan is a regular contributer to the LONDON Times. But I can see how you'd get them confused-- New York... London... what's the difference, really?

Still awaiting your list of what you think are lefty platforms.

Perhaps you should also make your snide remarks to The New Republic ... which also seems to think that Andrew works for the New York Times Magazine and the New York Times Book Review. ...

http://www.tnr.com/showBio.mhtml?pid=30

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Perhaps you should also make your snide remarks to The New Republic ... which also seems to think that Andrew works for the New York Times Magazine and the New York Times Book Review. ...

http://www.tnr.com/showBio.mhtml?pid=30

"Contributing to" is not the same as being a "reporter" for, which is what I believe you said Sullivan was. Many, many writers have contributed on occasion to the Times Magazine and the Book Review-- the numbers include numerous writers of all different political persuasions. It's not the same as writing for, or being a "reporter." Under your conditions, one could say Karl Rove reports for TIME Magazine, since a contribution from him appeared in the issue on Teddy Roosevelt.

Still "Waiting for Lefty" platforms...

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Most other goverrnments evacuating people here are actually flying them back to their home country without cost. But not the USG. They are perfectly happy to fund the World Toilet Summit (in Ireland, if my memory is correct) to the tune of $13 million or something. But 25,000 or so Americans stranded in the middle of a (quite unexpected) war zone? They better be ready to pay up if they want out."

And the point of this completely unverifiable personal anecdote ... from an unidentified source ... is ... ?