Rue

Its started and I responed to one already. And you are part of the cover. You are making a cover for the cover to dettract. I know you are with MI-6 and you worked with Mossad and the CIA.

Does this sound like a particularly well-hidden bomb to you? They did everything to make it noticable short of placing a large "CAR BOMB INSIDE" sign on the windshield. How "observant" did those emergency workers really have to be? I also note that that the other car was discovered after it was towed away. This means the "bombers" parked the damned thing in a loading zone or something similar; a place very likely posted with signs warning that vehicles left there for any length of time would be towed. Is this the world's stupidest terrorist attack ever, or is something else going on here? Certainly, if we realize that the goal of terrorism is not to kill per se but to instill terror, this would have to be recorded as another successful attack. London is certainly terrified (see the Daily Mail's "Where's the Next Bomb?'') But really. Would an organization like Al Quaeda, which has managed to stay ahead of the world's best intelligence agencies, be so apparently inept? AHH BUT YOU BEING THE GENIUS THAT YOU ARE HAVE FIGURED IT ALL OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!YES ITS ACTUALLY A ZIONIST COVER OPERATION!!!! THE BRITISH IN CAHOOTS WITH THE CIA AND MOSSAD DID IT!!!!!!!!!! Man this gets so predictable it aint even funny. Not even a day for the conspiracy stories to start from the security and terror experts.

That doesn't make their actions Israeli policy? Um, who then was dropping the bombs? I thought the subject was the children signing bombs. No one would argue that Israel doesn't use bombs. Yes indeed. The hatred is understandable because Israeli Jews are evil and do the same thing. Brilliant logic. The incident with Israeli children signing missiles is now the rationalization for trying to make this acceptable? Give me a break. Talk about trying to change the subject. Now in regards to those children they had been locked up in abomb shelter for over a week as missiles slammed into their homes. When they came out, the media encouraged and incited them into signing the missiles. They told them their cousins and relatives in the US would see their messages. MORE TO THE POINT THOSE MESSAGES WERE NOT EVEN DIRECTED AT CIVILIANS!!!!! Oh but why let facts get in the way. The event was staged by the media and the media manipulated these children. No there was no organized, orchestrated Israel government plot. To take this isolated incident and suggest it is the same as the daily anti-semitic hatred prepared and disemminated by Hamas is ludicrous and past the point of absurd and it shows the length some of you will go to-way past the point of absurdity to try deny facts and rationalize hatred. I challenge anyone particularly BC Chick into showing with specific details, how the Israeli government is training its children to hate Palestinians. This pathetic attempt to blame it on Israel is past tedious. The attempt to suggest some Zionist Jew (and we know they are all liars) got the translation wrong is even more pathetic. CNN? Well its a Zionist controlled puppet. No wait. I will confess. In nursery schools instead of singing ring around the Rosies, lthe little Jews of ethe evil Zion Empire are taught to sing " kill Palestinians, blow them up". Pathetic. B.C. what next? Will you and Kuzadd travel to Israel to save these little Jews. Will you move them to B.C.? Will Kuzadd adopt them? Israel are demons. It is their fault. It is all their fault. Bad bad Israelis. Poo. Ka Ka. Demons. Whores too.

Look....I'm just having some fun running rhetorical circles around you. Palestinians are not a monolithic block, same as Israelis. History will show that Israel had a much better Sugar Daddy. History will show Palestinians had the same Sugar Daddy and so did you.

Yup,Israel, had the sweetest, sugar daddies. all willing to aid her, and use her if necessary, inc her people, of course , with the consent of her government, to ensure, a foothold is maintained in the ME, oil rich region. Again more brilliant analysis. Israel is not just poo poo and ka ka, Israel is a whore too. The debate encourages such brilliant, cutting edge analysis that helps me grow and learn. Thanks again for your continuing brilliant contributions. Now excuse me as a good Zionist I must go have sex with a rich American. I am hoping its Paris Hilton. I tried Jennifer Lopez but Skeleton Boy won't let her out of his sight and Halle Berry is too busy with some gentile Canadian. I tried Hilary Clinton but she is more interested in Paris Hilton too.

Very intersting. As you mention, the same thing was done to Iran. I remember not just one, but a couple of instances when they misconstrued the words. Enough said. There you have it. Sinister Zionists lying. None of it is true. The cat or in this case, the Jew is out of the bag. If one goes over to professor Norman Finklesteins site, he also as issues with memri;s 'translation' skills, as very deceptive and misleading.

Well it was only a matter of time BC until you let it come out. Care to share with us the sinister Zionist plot and how the evil Israeli Jew Zionists and of course you mean Israeli Jews not Israeli Muslims or Christians, teach their children hate off the record. You obviously are in the know. Do share. Right on cue. Someone points out something that is a fact going on, and you just can't wait to turn it around and try insult Israel and smeer all its people. How does trying to smeer Israelis change anything? Using your inference, its o.k. to preach hatred since Israel does the same. Brilliant logic. Isn't that the standard approach? It is all because Israel is evil. Its tiresome B.C. Maybe you should take a look at your predictable knee-jerk Israel is a demon reaction and ask yourself whether you are in the position to criticize anyone. Man and I thought people in B.C. were a tad more layed back. I hate to burst your bubble BC but the Israeli public school and private school curriculums are public knowledge and can be obtained on the inter-net. I think you will be disappointed. And no there are no secret "I hate Palestinians lets kill them" clubs or "anti-Muslim" clubs. Good luck finding them. P.S. no I am not a member of any I hate Muslim clubs nor do I fund any nor does Steven Spielberg or Dustin Hoffman or Billy Crystal or Barbra Streisdan or Harrison Ford who is a quarter Jewish, or Adam Sandler or those Zionist Judges on Canadian Idol .

Its territory is also by far the biggest, I'm sure that plays a factor in it. Absolutely. Geographic size, population distribution, economic development, religious evolutionary development, all are important factors. Me personally, I believe the concept of being "isolationist" i.e., thinking if we just ignore people, they will go away is silly and its far from a new notion. I think because of terrorism, famines, war, natural disasters, medical pandemics, world trade. the internet, air-travel, multi-national financial empires, and the International Monetary Fund and its policies, all countries and societies, whether we like it or not, affect each other and the notion we can ignore each other has become impossible. The first world exists as it does precisely because of the third and fourth world remaining what they are. To pretend the first world can just ignore the third world it uses for its resources when its not convenient, is silly. Past the silliness, me personally, I can not imagine saying, let's just leave countries alone and not have a world vision. No I am not part of the illuminati conspiring for a one world government but I think its absurd to think the planet's humans can stay in isolated in-bred isolationist pockets and try ignore each other. where you from Banglaqdesh-poof begone. You where you from, Iran you say-poof begone! Darfur-poof begone! Let's just hold our breath and Darfur no longer exists or those quarrelsome Muslims and Jews of the Middle East will go away. Sorry, I find this notion of isolationism a symptom of people who want to segregate and hide from anything they can't conquer and control. Make those angry savages go away-poof begone! Got news for you. They live next door to you now. Good luck gating your community. Eventually you will have to come out, if for no oher reason to pay one of those savages for something you need.

Well I have to agree with you. For example, I think we would all agree World War Two was just in the sense that Hitler had to be stopped. But sometimes to do the just thing we have to do unjust things such as those Dresden bombings, or the killing of soldiers who threw their hands up in surrender, or when soldiers on the anti-Nazi side raped civilians. Yes in war, even the so called "just" side can engage in war crimes. I believe that is your point. I think in today's world, we do not see conventional warfare anymore. What we see are civilians who fuse two identities-a civilian one with a guerilla warrior one. The problem is these fused entities now engage in terror. They kill civilians. They do not wear uniforms. They use civilians as shields. A conventional army when fighting them, necessarily to survive is dragged to their level. We live in a world where people justify terrorism as just and necessary and morally acceptable. It is justified by people who claim they have no other way to express themselves. I personally believe no act of terror is just or can be justified. In regards to war, I find the conventions we humans have drafted to try define how to conduct war and make it "civilized" is absurd. The only just wars I can think of are back in Africa, when tribes used to fight, they would simply dance and gesture and never kill each other and acts of murder to express a political will was very rare. I thinkt he vast majority of humans have shown, even in wars where there seems to be one side with a moral cause, the distinction between right and wrong, soon becomes distorted and clouded. I think for example, the longer American soldiers stay in Iraq, exposed to an invisible enemy constantly killing its soldiers, the more likely it gets caught up in a cloud of confusion making it impossible to see who its enemy really is, resulting in the deaths of innocent civilians which in turn fuel terrorists. I think in the Palestine-Israel conflict, each side has equal moral right to independence but this has become distorted and misappropriated by terrorists whose motus opperendi is to get civilians on either side to believe they are each other's enemiesn and that they can't possibly be the same or want the same things. To me the only thing I know about war and violence is it makes everyone bleed the exact same way.

So such easy questions. Sigh! I guess this "God" is either the notion there is something intelligent behind all that we try to comprehend but can't. Humans by nature look into their reality and they tend to do 2 things; i-believe that there is something beyond it all that does make sense but we just can't understand and need to have faith that it will show itself to us and explain when we are ready for it-OR, ii-they take in all the f..ck ups of life, all the war, injsutice and savagery and say well if a God existed its his fault for allowing this or God can't possibly exist because a God would not allow such shit to happen. Here is the way I see it and it is only my opinion. I can understand why humans react both ways. With those who believe there is no God, I would hope they are humanists and believe in the absence of a God, humans must act in a civil way as we are creating all the mess and so we must clean it up. I hope that, because I believe SOME who feel there is no God, basically use it to say, since there is no God they can just do whatever the f..ck they want and not worry about it. Most atheists or agnositics I know are humanists and believe humans must act civilized. I have though met some very twisted psychotics who believe there is no God and no consequence to what they do. Now me, I think there is a God, only I don't like using that word. I prefer to see it as an abstract concept that simply means there is something beyond or behind what we think we see. I personally see it as an abstract notion beyond any thing our human brains conceive. I think many people don't see it as existing because they feel when humans f..ck up this God allows it. What if this "God" created free will? What if the reason wwe f..ck up is precisely because we have free will and God can not interfere because to do so would "kill" us? Could it be our free will means we are responsible for our own actions and when we do something evil, we pay the consequence eventually as a way to teach us? I believe we lose faith in the sight of the ugliness and depth of how savage humans can be but it may be what we can't see because we are not ready to see is how if we do such evil, we will experience the same evil we do to others and in this way we will learn. I personally think we all chose to come into existence to learn and we were expelled or expunged or spit out or vomited out, or sent out from this abstract notion of God, in a free-fall or free will precisely to experience through these things. While we came forth from this thing God, and are seperated from it one level, and allowed to f..ck up so we can learn...I believe we also still remain part of it and it suffers through us and experiences all the pain we do as much as it does the joy. I think its hard to explain to people that to learn there must be contrast. One could not understand love without also understanding hatred. To appreciate and cherish peace, unfortunately some must first go through war and terror. It seems like a ridiculous way for an intelligent omnipotent entity to have decided to run things but did it? Could this God have sneezed and expelled quadra zillions of us souls to experience because it created a system that when all is said and done is about sharing its perfection? I think so. I think what we can not see is that suffering and all the shit humans cause may not seem like it, but is part of an experience that leads to understanding what love is. O.k. so I have no proof. None. It is an opinion. I guess for me it is no more non-sensical then it is to believe that one when looks around and sees so many intricate layers of connection and interaction, one could believe it's all an accident. Do I project intelligent design on chaos as does a religious fanatic who sees the face of Mary in a stain on a sheet? Maybe. Lol.

Shawn Brant has been "charged" with mischief. Mischief the last time I looked is not a charge of murder, terrorism or a violent crime. There is no doubt in my mind, the charge will be dismissed and was just done as a political move byt he government to show it does not approve of open calls for militancy. The charge will I am sorry to say not require he be physically arrested and at most it would be a fine if its not plea bargained away or dismissed when he does nothing violent. I am not agreeing with the man's calls for militancy. Neither did the vast majority of native leaders. But to suggest he is a terrorist and what the native people are doing today are terrorists and smeer them all because this man called for militant actions that yes could have become terrorist, is b.s.

Non-sequitur ad hominem attack followed by irrelevant mud-slinging at the Liberal Party. Double-edged dig at your debating skills. Just once I would like to take a person who advocates using the army to crush his own citizens for expressing their democratic rights and have them spend a day in Afghanistan or Iraq, or any conflict zone. Only a Canadian who takes his freedom and majority status for granted would speak in such terms. If this person knew how precious freedom is, he would know no soldier in the Armed Forces needs him to tell them to use their weapons against their own people. Imagine if this guy had to live in a communist or facist country or in a country such as Zimbabwe or Sudan. What an insult to soldiers fighting in Afghanistan.

Oh why bother. As you say, Shades of Ipperwash...perhaps they should just be shot dead? Is that what you infer? I notice you spend all your attention on Mr. Brant. Why is it you select this man, and seem to conveniently ignore the 99.99% of native peoples who are demonstrating today lawfully and peacefully? Gee I just can't imagine why you can only focus on Mr. Brant. Mr. Brant has broken no laws, so calling for him to be arrested is a tad difficult since he has not broken any law, although from the sounds of it, you would like to arrest people who have different political views then you do. Now just who is the thug?

Nobody I know was "intimidated or coerced". More like, "damn...again?" Terrorists is a stretch You know how it goes Guyser. The word is subjectively used by those who disagree with another's political views to gain moral ground and demonize what the user of the word feels is his enemy. When I use the word with Hamas or cells of Fatah, I am specific to refer to cells who admit and openly state they believe in killing civilians to express their political will as well as using bombs in public places to incite hatred and distrust. To call native people terrorists for demonstrating is of course what I would expect from the same few who write in constantly questioning any right of native peoples to express themselves politically. Its a shame no natives bother any more to be part of this forum. I wish they could see the majority of us non natives understand why they are having a day of demonstration.

How is he a terrorist? We may disagree on Israel Ms BC but on this one I would ask the same question. These posters who are going on as if these native people are committing terror have no idea what the difference is between people who protest and people who use bombs to kill innocent people. Then again the way words like "freedom fighter" or "terrorist" are used by people these days does not surprise me. I reserve the word terrorist for someone who attempts to kill and injure civilians as an expression of poltical will or do the same with property on a wide scale level. At this point the native peoples have not injured or killed any innocent people and their demonstrations h have not blown up buildings to try kill people. Mr. Brant may have called for violence but he was not supported by the vast majority of natives and their leaders who are supported by the majority of Canadians today and in their efforts to bring attention to the oevr 800 land claims that have been allowed to sit and rot along with their people still trying to defend themselves and explain why it is they would like fresh water and work and their legal rights properly enforced. They have a right to demonstrate. If it inconveniences Geoffrey because he can't get to his cottage I am sure he can find a way to get out of his car and talk to these terrorists and see if they will kill him. I am sure one or two might be tempted but I think in this case he will be disappointed to know they are civilized, decent, caring people.

The Kapitan wrote in regards to his use of the word "fag" and my tonque lashing him on it (excuse the expression which could be interperated as a sinful act); " @Rue:This is all about one word to you? Some groups may find the N-bomb less offensive than others, same goes for the word "fags". If your feelings are hurt, my appologies." My feelings are not hurt and no this is not just about the use of that word but the fact you use it and then offer such a half-assed apology shows where your head and heart are at. That was my point. "I never claimed to be a devout Christian." Well Kapitan we figured the above out although your tone of righteousness and constant need to lecture us all on moral standards could have fooled me. "If you're going to accuse me of being a hypocrite, at least spell it correctly." Spell what krectly? " but I do not see this (using the word fag) being hatred-driven. " You don't see a lot of things Kapitan-that is the point. Now Kapitan we are going to try one last attempt to show you why your comments are absurd. You went off lecturing us that sexuality does not require any devices. No doubt you think you are being moral and religious when you say that. Of course using your analogy if a human is paralyzed or crippled, they should not use a walker or a wheel-chair. If they are deaf they should not use a hearing aid. Hey no glasses. Why? Because the body was born without them. Oh but no, its o.k. to use these devices as long as you don't orgasm right Kapitan? Now Kapitan, before you quickly jump to your blinders and say, humans can create devices to make their lives better as long as they don't orgasm and use them for sex purposes, I have news for you. There are millions of people with physical issues, bad backs, dry vaginas, quadra and paraplegia, diabetes and other circulatory problems, psychological disorders, taking medication that has side effects, etc., that prevent them from being able to have sex without the help of devices and aids. Do these people need your permission Kapitan? Will you give them special dispensation? I have only one thing to say-if someone wants to use sexual devices or toys, I give you my permission. Right. Actually I was in New Orleans once and I was doing the usual tourist walk on Bourbon Street and went into a sex shop (seized by a sudden satanic urge of sin) and was looking at the stuff when in came to women buying an enormous dildo (or is that dildot Kapitan how do you spell it). I was trying not to look too dumb when one of the women looked over at me and simply stated-"we wouldn't need this if we could find a way to get you to shut the f..ck up when you were done". I grabbed a piece of paper and pen and responded in writing; " but Madam, I am a mute". As everyone laughed my wife came in and asked me what I was doing. The two ladies said to her I was charming but not to worry. Uh yah. Like I had any chance. My wife tells me I am not funny and should leave people alone. Hmmmf.

Hah. Don't think so he was Jewish. But he was a communist and a person known to have sex with young girls, so there you go a Jewish pedophile. Plus he was a communist!!!! I mean a commie!!!!!!!!!A Jewish commie who liekd young girls!!!!!!!! Evil as they come. (note" the above comments were said in sarcastic gest by a Jewish person!)

'I do not represent any institution when I post on this forum. " You did Kapitan. You came on these posts and claimed you represented the Catholic religion and your views as to homosexuality were based on your Catholicism, and you on quite a few occassions used your religious status to justify your arguements. You can't have it both ways. You can't refer to your religious beliefs when its convenient, then pretend I have to ignore your claims of being Christian. I have the perfect right to say a Christian would not engage in hatred and use words like "fag". I did not attack any Christians or their religious beliefs. I challenge you claiming to be Christian and then using such words. Yes it most certainly makes you game for criticism and being accused of being a hippocrate. "It is thanks to freedom of speach that I use words such as "fag"." No it is thanks to your ignorance and hated. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to use words you know are derogatory and used as an expression of hatred and condescention of gays. "I may share my opinions, perception and I am free to agree or disagree with you." UI could give a rat's asp whether you disagree with me. I do challenge you when you come on this post and pretend using derogatory words to insult people is an expression of opinion. Calling someone a fag is not an expression of opinion and you know it. Don't play cute with me. "In my mention of "God gave Adam and Eve everything they needed...", seems like you had to come up with the most distorted interpretation. You completely missed my point and make rediculous accusations, then empty threats. There is no room on this forum for "disparaging comments about you", that translates into personal attacks and you would be reported for such behavior." No I in fact threw your point back in your face. You are making a mockery of the Bible. If you believe quite literally that God created Adam and Eve then necessarily you know God created gays. For you to pretend God only created heterosexuals is as absurd as you trying to tell people using the word "fag" is an exercise of freedom of expression and is stating an opinion. You use the Bible to suit your prejudices and those prejudices are irrational and we are all waiting for you to switch back to your claiming to be Catholic to explain to us all that in the Catholic religion gays are not created by God. "My point was, humanity started with no sex shops..." Your subjective opinion was you think people are born without sexual desire and simply acquire it and if they acquire homosexual tendencies its immoral. Yah we know. We know how you claim this is what Christianity says. I also happen to know Christians, Jews, Muslims and many people religious or not, who don't conclude that based on the Bible and we believe sexuality is both genetic and inherent as well as learned and that homo-sexuality as a naturally occuring phenomena in all life forms and not just humans. "these things do not "enhance" the world's sexual relations, " Now you talk nonsense. Fro many people enjoying sex with toys makes them more loving and most certainly enhances their sexual and human relationships and makes them more loving. "but rather compromise them. " When you claim to speak on behalf of everyone I call you on it. Not once in your response to you apply these opinions to yourself and that is why I find you a blatant and out of control hippocrate. Speak for yourself. Your concepts of sexuality and morality apply to you. Do not phrase yourself as if you speak on behalf of humanity because you do not and quite frankly when you speak in such terms it would be absolutely no different then me stating" I think sticking a dildot up your bumb could enhance your relationship with your wife". I could easily say this is not meant to be offensive and is merely me expressing my freedom of expression. You obviously would find it unacceptable. So practice the Golden Rule you seem to be oblivious to or using tour reasoning people have the right to tell you your opinions are defective because you won't use sex toys and maybe do it with a man in leather. Either way its absurd. "Humanity essentially began with everything it needed for ideal sexual relations." Here you go again speaking on behalf of humanity. Try some huimility and state, in my opinion I believe humans have everything they need for sex and do not need to use anything else. Because in fact that is all it is and the Vibrator Manufacturers Association of North America disagrees with you. I also have news for you, I know Catholics who use dildots. It doesn't make them any less human. In fact I suggested it to them as part of counseling and their Priest couldn't agree more. Believe it or not some Priests are quiet hip to such things. "The story of Adam and Eve illustrates" Its a story. I will read from it whatever I want. Do not lecture me on how to understand it. You have monopoly on it. Again had you started the above with "in my opinion" I would have no problem but once again in your arrogance you spew out as if you are the sole authority on how to understand the story. To me the story is only that a story. It is symbolic. I do not take it literally and for me and millions we believe if there is a God, he created all humans and not just heterosexuals and your reading of Adam and Eve to justify your prejudice is only that you twisting a story to suit your subjective opinions. Using your brilliant analogy there would have had to be incest and we all know God does not approve of incest and yet there would have had to have been incest if the Adam and Eve story is true. No you can't select the story to suit your needs and ignore the other parts of it that necessarily flow simply because it doesn't fit into your simplistic formula. "God creating a man and a woman (because if the two first and only humans were of the same sex, humanity would not last beyond one generation). " There you proved to everyone there had to have been incest which is clearly against the ten commandments. The problem with quoting the Bile Kapitan is it always comes back to bite you in that preacher's ass. "If God intented for homosexuality to be appropriate, the two first humans would then have had the capacity to reproduce within the same sex or some other really explicitly obvious sign would have flagged homosexuality as appropriate." The above statement is completely irrational because according to you God intended incest bu not homosexuality and all the lfie forms that have homo-sexuality were not created by God or are all inappropriate and God when he made all these life forms and their homo-sexual behaviour, kept making the same mistake over and over or all these life forms had intelligent thought and chose deliberately to be imoral and become gay and flaunt God's rules. Talk about absurd. "I'm not representing any institution when I post on this forum, this is my interpretation, feel free to argue, but please bring forward good reasons for believing otherwise." I say it again you constantly use your religion to justify your beliefs and now when I call you on it suddenly when you use the word fag or interprate the Bible, all your references to believing this because you are Catholic are to be ignored? No I don't think so. "If we are to argue about Scripture's contents (since you brought it up), God created Adam and Eve from dust, and all others are their decendants (or later created from dust, but Adam and Eve were the first two)." I did not bring religion up to defend my beliefs that gays were abnormal and sinful, you did. Nice try. As for your comments on Kinsey, there is zero need to respond since you deliberately misquoted them and ignored what they said. You are now at the point where you simply pretend something does not exist when you can't agree with it. I am tired of the game. I say to everyone the moment you engaged in the word "gay" you showed your true colours and it wasn't done innocently as in your defence of it you in fact show it was deliberate and you feel you are entitled to say it.

No but God created people like you who use words like "fag" and think they are in the position to lecture people and speak on behalf of God because I mean we all know you are God's right hand. Using your reasoning by the way, God would have had to have created Adam and Steve as he created all humans the last time I read YOUR Bible. If you are goiung to lecture people on Christianity and twist it to try defend your ignorance and bigotry at least try make some sense when you spew off such simplistic and pointless comments. By the way, good Christian prophet and spokesperson for God, the word Fag is derogatory. Would you like it if I made disparaging comments about you? Yah I know you are a good Christian and you don't hate "fags". With good Christians like you preaching love and tolerance, none of us have to worry about humanity. I do not represent any institution when I post on this forum. It is thanks to freedom of speach that I use words such as "fag". I may share my opinions, perception and I am free to agree or disagree with you (this is hopefully not a new concept to you). In my mention of "God gave Adam and Eve everything they needed...", seems like you had to come up with the most distorted interpretation. You completely missed my point and make rediculous accusations, then empty threats. There is no room on this forum for "disparaging comments about you", that translates into personal attacks and you would be reported for such behavior. My point was, humanity started with no sex shops, no contraceptives, etc. and going by the rule "less is more", these things do not "enhance" the world's sexual relations, but rather compromise them. Humanity essentially began with everything it needed for ideal sexual relations. The story of Adam and Eve illustrates God creating a man and a woman (because if the two first and only humans were of the same sex, humanity would not last beyond one generation). If God intented for homosexuality to be appropriate, the two first humans would then have had the capacity to reproduce within the same sex or some other really explicitly obvious sign would have flagged homosexuality as appropriate. I'm not representing any institution when I post on this forum, this is my interpretation, feel free to argue, but please bring forward good reasons for believing otherwise. If we are to argue about Scripture's contents (since you brought it up), God created Adam and Eve from dust, and all others are their decendants (or later created from dust, but Adam and Eve were the first two). @Mad_Michael: What concept? Back to the drawing board... it doesn't make sense to be so exclusive when defining sexual orientations... if someone has homosexual relations, they are gay until they make a firm decision to turn away from this behavior. Going by your exclusive definition of homosexuality, anyone who would have a mere heterosexual (or pedophilo) fantasy could not be GBLT and would automatically be part of the heterosexual majority... if you're going to be so exclusive, gee... I suppose gay people couldn't possibly exist at all! Here is my point. You have now come out and shown by using the word "fag" which is a hateful word and a bigoted one, that you are in fact hateful and yes since you come on this forum and use Christiniatity to t ry justify your hatred I have the right to call you a hippocrate and ridicule your use of Christianity. I have not criticized the Christian religion-I criticize your attempt to call youself a Christian and nown once again your attempt to hid behind it and say because I challenge you for claiming yourself to be a Christian while using hate words, I am attacking the Christian religion. In fact I am saying you are making a mockery of your claims to being Christian and you are an ignorant bully for using the word fag and no I will not tolerate it . Your defence for use of the word is absolutely ridiculous. Would you claim its freedom of expression to use the word n..gger or kike? Well? Freedom of expression does not give you the right to engage in deliberately hateful words. It makes you a pathetic bully. As for your other generalizations and stereotypes, why would anyone bother to respond to you now you have made it clear you think it appropriate to refer to gays as fags. You are entitled to no further dialogue until you at least acknowledge the word "fag" is being used by you in a hateful manner. Or would you have us believe it is part of the Christian teachings given to you? Well? You can't have it both ways. You can't come on these posts posing as a devout Christian and then hiding behind it to use words like fag.

Bonam I think anyone who in fact bothers to read what happened will kno Hamas in fact violated the ceasefire numerous times and did not hold to it for 18 months but Buffy doesn't let facts get in her way. In fact when Israel pulled out of Gaza, the first thing Hamas did was launch missile attacks and it does today as it has done every day continuously, Of course Buffy lives far from the missiles and hasn't a clue that they are being shot off daily. Israel went in to Gaza to prevent missile attacks from Hamas. Hamas then did what Hezbollah did, state it was only defending itself. So when Israel left, what does Hamas do, immediately shoot missiles into Israel stating-oh did we state we only shoot at Israel because they are in Gaza? Did we say that. Oh hee hee. We also want to wipe out Israel. Come on you knew that. Hezbollah used the exact same p.r. stunt. It told the world it only existed because Israel was on Lebanese soil. Israel went into Lebanon to prevent missile attacks and terrorist attacks being launched against its civilians. It said to Hezbollah, you only fight is because we are on Lebanese soil, fine we leave. What happens? The day they left Hezbollah begins missile attacks into Israel proper. did we say we were simply fighting to liberate Lebanon says Hezbollah? Oh tee hee hee, you also know our charter says we want to wipe out Israel. This is precisely the bull Israel puts up with. Terror groups whose agendas are clear and unambiguous and call for its eradication and yet we have the Buffy Arm Chair Experts writing in with OH MY GOD expressions pretending Israel is not in danger and are making it all up and then fabricating misrepresentations that Hamas stuck to an 18 month ceasefire. Now in regards to the following comment; "The average Palestinian voted for Hamas, and thus knowingly voted for war, death, and suffering." I am not so sure about the comment. Look I do not doubt there are Palestinians who when they voted for Hamas voted for terrorism and support its terror. But I also think there may be many Palestinians who voted for Hamas not for terror but because it was the only alternative to the corupt and violent PLO. I believe people voted for it precisely because at the time they were desperate for a non corupt regime. Hamas holds the hearts and minds of its people hostage to its desire to eradicate Israel because of their desperate need for a non corupt government. So no I am not ready to demonize and write off all Palestinians. Even if is true which I do not believe it is because its a generalization that suggests all Palestinians are deliberately evil and deserve to die, that is wrong. Its wrong to condemn any people to suffer for any reason. You know I am as strong a supporter of Israel's right to exist as they come, but you should also know everytime I see seomeone demonizing Palestinians and saying they deserve their fate I say don't do that because that is no different then how people demonize Jews and Israelis. Its wrong to take an entire people and hold them morally responsible for the actions of terrorists who claim to represent them. Palestinians are humans suffering and caught up in the same historic curse as the Israelis. They are as much victims as Israeli civilians. Most Israelis polled as much as they hate Palestinian terrorists want peace with them. Yes Israelis because they have suffered terrorist attacks do not trust Palestinians and think they hate them but this is the result of trauma. Yes when Palestinians are polled the majority indicate they want all of Israel and engage in anti-semitic stereotypes they have been taught, but that is exactly what trapped, desperate people come to believe when its forced on them and they believe they have no other choices. Like the Israelis I do not excuse it. I explain it though as a psychological result of trauma. For me e need to help people who are traumatized heal and to do that we need to challenge any stereotype or generalization that makes either appear evil or the enemy. To find peace these people need time to seperate and heal then slowly interact in projects where they share their pain and see they bled and suffered the same way. This takes time and careful planning and will need the help of peacemakers from other countries. It will require leaving politics behind and embracing basic precepts of trauma and survival counseling which transcend politics and religion and are best illustrated by the healing circles used by aboriginal peoples in Canada with criminals. The healing circles of the aboriginal peoples are very similiar to approaches in Islam and Judaism for healing community conflicts and it of course is also something one day who knows peacemakers like the Mennonites may be able to help with as they understand it too. Until then we should demonize Palestinians. I can understand why Israelis fear Palestinians and vice versa. I blame it on the terrorists first and foremost who deliberately use terrror to get them to hate each other. But I also see there being failures of the leaders of the Islamic faith to denounce terror, and a failure of the Arab League to come clean and denounce terror but instead secretly let Israel do all its fighting for it against terrorists. I slo see failure with the religious leaders in both Palestine and Israel for failing to form a peace committee and walking out together hand in hand in peace marches but instead staying silent leaving any peace work to grass roots organizations who are dismissed for not being religiously appropriate. I do not blame the average Israeli or Palestinian for the same reasons. They both are faced with terror. I see failure with the religious leaders, maybe the UN, politicians, bust mostly the terrorists who are scum of the earth and make peace impossible. I will not hate or demonize Palestinians. They suffer and bleed as do Israelis. They are both victims.

"OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!! Scott - Palestine is an occupied territory as such the people there have a right to defend themselves and attempt to regain their lands. All would be so easily solved if Israel would dismantle the settlements and get the heck out. Period. 50 missles is nothing - what about Israels hundreds of nukes?"" Its interesting Buffy chooses to write in sounding like an onvoxious Vallery Girl and then claims she is insulted? Let us look at the above comment. This typifies your intellectual dishonesty. Hamas's charter is not to defend anything and you know it. Its charter which is there for anyone read, talks about killing all the Jews of Israel, and then taking Israel and creating a Muslim theocracy in Israel, The West Bank, Gaza and then Jordan and probably Lebanon. It has nothing to do with defending Gaza or Hamas. Nothing and for you to suggest that shows you have zero credibility. Hamas has never been a defence organization. It in fact kills Muslim civilians who do not collaborate with it. It was responsible just two days ago for attacks on 3,000 Christians in the Gaza. You further show your intellectual dishonesty by suggesting if Israel dismantled its settlements and "get the heck out" there would be no problem. Yes Buffy you are quite transparent. First of all trying to suggest the only reason Hamas exists is to protest the settlements is as bug a crock of sheeyit as it gets. The creation of Hamas and its charter have nothing to do with protesting settlements and everything to do with the Muslim Brotherhood's desire for a theocracy in Jordan-Israel-Palestine and its desire to also place a theocracy in Egypt, and eventually absord Lebanon. You Buiffy of course make no effort to read about Hamas and its agenda and instead make these shallow inferences that it simply is defending Palestinians or protesting settlements. Oh its so easy in the world of Buffy to select only those notions which suit her agenda. As for your comment "just get the heck out"-gee Buffy aren't we smarmy and cute. Of course do you mean get the heck out of Israel or do you simply mean get the heck out of the West Bank? Well Buffy? Is your ambiguity sweet and innocent or are you once again too gutless to come out and say you want Israel erased so you make such veiled references? Well? As for your Vally Girl routine over missiles, you live in a world without conflict so your comments about missiles are simply you reflecting the ignorance that comes from a sheltered person spoiled and fat on the luxury of the peace in her country and so writes in and sounds precisely like what she is, a spoiled brat making valley girl comments. Grow up Buffy. Living with a missile pointed at your face is not a joke. Your Oh My God sarcasm belittles not just Israeli Jews, but the very Palestinians who will also die or did it not dawn on you and your Valley Girl Oh My God comments, that with a country so small one missile will kill not just those get the heck out Jews but Muslims as well. As for your comments on nuclear bombs. Use your brain Buffy. Do you think Israel would nuke Gaza or the West Bank? Are you that clueless or is that Valley Girl act genuine. Here Buffy lets talk in small words...if Israel nuked the West Bank and Gaza it would kill everyone in Israel, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan from fall-out. Yes in Buffy's world Israel will wipe itself out to defend itself. I guess we call that Buffy Logic. Buffy once again you try turn this into a simplistic Hamas good guy v.s. Israel bad guy issue. Egypt, Jordan, Mr. Abbas, and Lebanon are equally as threatened by Hamas's missiles and ties with Hezbollah as is Israel but of course in Buffy's world we block that part out. The potential to use these missiles to create a huge war and have Iran use a nuclear bomb is real. It is not a joke subject to Oh My Gaws guffaws. It is precisely why Abbas and Jordan and Egypt and Israel are meeting. It is precisely why Saudi Arabia and Lebanon are informally involved. It is precisely whyt Israel is now on crisis alert as is the US,and Russia and Turkey. You think this is a joke? China and Russia have already given Israel the green light. So has the Arab League. You think this is a joke? We could very well see commando strikes in Gaza or aerial bombings where innocent civilians get caught in the cross fire. This is not a joke. As much as you think this is a joke Buffy, Israel can not sit with missiles pointed at its civilians that would wipe them out in literally less then 3 minutes. For those of us who care to discuss the conflict without making Oh my God guffaws..many of us worry an invasion of Gaza is immindent and the Arab League is openly discussing it with Israel and China and Russia are goingf to sit this out and it will come down to whether the US feels this will destablize Iraq or not. An attack on Gaza may also include a strike on Iran. This is very serious. What we see is a very real war front emerging between the Sunni Muslim nations versus Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Sudan on the otherwise. No this is not a joke and innocent people could die. Like Oh my Gawd Buffy some of us are not chewing gum and talking about it like silly school girls. Hamas was democratically elected. Hamas held to a ceasefire for over 18 months, while Israel did not. In fact Israel is currently violating another ceasefire term by flying over Lebanese airspace (something she has Never stopped doing). Besides that - the one screaming for war seems to be the right wing extremists leading the land of Israel. They called for war with Iraq, they are calling now for war with Iran. Fine if they are the ones who will fight it - but they won't be - they are proxy warriors and need only call on their puppy the US. So, who REALLY wants this? The average person in Israel (probably not) the average Palestinian - probably NOT either. Those who beleive in Greater Israel (ie LAND and RESOURCES now belonging to others) YES. That has been the political aim of the Zionist ideology since its inception. (I'll wait for your next insult with anticipation!!) You leave yourself open to insults when you make such deliberately insulting comments such as "50 missiles is nothing". Your reference to

And you Buffy where do you live? Are the missiles pointed at you? Do you live with missiles pointed at you from a group that states they need to wipe you out? Do you? Easy to make such childish remarks when you live far removed from the hostility and have no clue what it is like to have your life threatened.

"Well, as I said before, using the same logic, your double-standard in your criticism of Muslim countries shows that you are anti-Muslim." No when I criticize terrorist groups or the foreign policy of Islamic countries, or those individuals who claim to be Muslims who are fundamentalists, I do not criticize Muslims as a people nor do I engage in stereotypes of Muslims. "Maybe you ARE unable to distinguish between a regime and a people and that's why you assume all of Israel's critics must be anti-semitic?" No I know the difference and most of us do. The criticism was not directed at the Israeli government, it was directed at how its people live and make their living. It necessarily suggests Israelis make blood money and make their money unethically and that is precisely why I have challenged it. BC Chick how is suggesting Israelis are unethical and dishonest and make their money from others misfortunes, anything but a slur of people and not their governments? Please explain because BC you can't make slurs about an entire people and then pretend you are simply discussing its government. You not I fused and confused the people with the government.

But do you raise such arguements and criticize other countries the same way? Well do you? When was the last time you wrote in and suggested France, the USA, The European Union, Japan, Russia make their money from the suffering of others? Why the double standard? It may seem like a persecution complex to you, but to me when I see the arguement that singles out Israel as making its money off the suffering of others and that is the inference is it not-then you bet I call it for what it is simply an updated version of the sinister Jew making blood money stereotype and no BC Chick its not an accident you used a Christian religious term. See you may think its all sweet and innocent including using Christian terms like epiphany and insisting you are not engaging in anything anti-semitic but I suggest to you its so deeply entrenched in your psyche, you may not even be aware of it and how it comes across and yes as a Jew maybe I notice it precisely because I am not a gentile livi8ng in BC who uses phrases like epiphany. BC I doubt you are intentionally bigoted. I do not doubt you are a good, idealistic person and yes I respect your opinions and Buffy's. No I do not expect you to agree with me. What I would kindly challenge you to do is ask yourself-what are the implications of suggesting Israel "benefits" from turmpoil economically. Just what does such a concept really enforce? How is it when Israel does well, its portrayed as unethical and based on blood? Of course Israel is also portrayed as controlling the US senate and congress and engaged in a conspiracy to control world markets, Hollywood, banks. Come on BC Chick, isn't that where it ends up? Isn't that where such discussions always end up? All I am asking you to do is analyze how Israel's economy works and not turn it into a simplistic stereotype. I expect that from the Kuzadds of the world not you. Yah I know. Some of your best friends are gentiles.