jbg

Thanks for a great post.

If most of the time people didn't routinely and more or less without question obey police there'd be a serious societal disorder problem. And the police didn't kill her; she offed herself.

As Rue points out, I participate in threads about the CDN elections, Quebec separation, global warming, U.S. politics and crime as well as threads about Israel. And I post threads about worldwide atrocities to combat the deafening silence while the world concentrates on imperfect Western countries.

GxD help us all. -k People had the same reaction in 1979-80 as Reagan's election looked increasingly likely. I for one haven't decided if I like Cruz or not; I just think he's the likely winner.

I am actually expecting Cruz to be the nominee and the 45th President.

Trump is live entertainment, pure and simple.

I'm with you on this; about the only time we'll agree. The opponents have limited amounts of compassion and no sense of humor (as opposed to the frequent mis-spelling "humour").

Barack Hussein Obama wants one thing and that is to be liked by as many people as possible. Sorry that is not the function of a leader. A leader must first advocate for the entity that he/she leads and that is the United States. The leader must second make decisions in the interest of the United States. Not what's good for the world; what's good for his country. Barack Hussein Obama is, as to the Constitution, an "Article III Section 3" President: Section 3 Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. (emphasis supplied)

Thanks for reminding me. At least you have, at least for now, a good leader.

Is Sudan stateless? That was an answer? Are you kidding?

Do you really think that any country but MAYBE the U.S. would seriously re-impose sanctions? And if they do they'll be far more porous than they are now. And what about long-term deals then in progress? Anyone who thinks that works is on better drugs than I can afford. You have got to be kidding. Iran wants nukes so that it's politically impossible for SA or Israel to reject their demands, or credibly threaten to attack. And given the Taliban's dubious record of cooperating in the 9/11 attacks was regime change a bad idea in Afghanistan? Does the Taliban have some administrative talent of which I'm unaware? The three countries you mentioned, as of 2000, were enemy countries, pure and simple. Why should we agree to give them lethal weapons and pay them to install those. And as for the argument that Iran is just getting back its own money, how about these kind of victims get paid first? Woman injured in 1993 WTC bombing gets $5.4M after 22 years

I forget whether Munich was October 1937 or 1938. In the latter case it was less than a year. If the former about two years.

Unless you wanted the fun of Khomeni types 25 years earlier, sure.

Just like the legacy of a famous British PM is "peace in our times."

Thanks. I wavered for about 20 minutes and wasn't sure if it focused on the U.S., or "everywhere else." I knew for sure it wasn't Canada. Is that the best you can come up with? I didn't listen to Netanyahu's reaction before composing my post. For all I knew he was going to support the agreement.

The word "Zionism" appears nowhere in the OP. I have a real problem with the drumbeat of criticism of Israel and none of the atrocities such as those covered in the OP.

Israel is subject to criticism. To the point is that critics of Israel's policies within Israel don't face death. Just try criticizing Khamememi (sp) in Iran, or Sudan's leadership in Sudan.

Since the deal is a fresh topic, I started a thread with my reaction (link). I think the deal is a treasonous abomination.

From the looks of it, the U.S. and G5 + 1 have, to quote Paul Simon in the Boxer, given up the store to Iran in exchange for a "pocket full of mumbles." The actual lyrics are better: I have squandered my resistance for a pocketful of mumbles, such are promises All lies and jest, still a man hears what he wants to hear And disregards the rest (link) The West has "sqandered (its) resistance" and "hear(d) what (it) wants to hear." Iran gets a fistful of money, which I doubt it will use to improve the life of its people. It will use the funds for furthering their struggle against the West, and in particular Israel. If it violates, the West will have no political will to snap back sanctions. Too much money will be being made to make that possible. Madmen will now have the nuclear keys. My own instinct is that Israel will not just sit there and watch this play out. They may not bomb the reactors. But watch for members of the Supreme Cultural Revolution Council (SCRC, also known as the Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution) (link) and possibly Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Leader of the Islamic Revolution(link) to serve terms for a length determined by the IDF.

I get it. So the cameras are everywhere in Israel, which permits virtually unrestricted reporting. And MSM never troubles to mention that there are reports of atrocities elsewhere. Sounds good to me.

I give up then. Why are atrocities that are objectively far worse than any of Israel's garner no outrage? If my theories are, to quote DRE "not worth piss in a wind storm" or to quote Bryan "garbage" what are your theories? And Bubber, what is a "fast forward thread"?

My own theory is that most anti-Zionism is re-labelled Jew-hatred.

I just watched about the most gut-wrenching video I've ever seen. The Nubian Tribes, apparently Christian, live in the Nubian Mountains of Sudan. A news article (link to article) with incorporated video(link to video) details the atrocities. The government has been bombing to prevent the delivery of vaccines and medical supplies. The government has been randomly bombing and strafing the people so that they regularly flee into caves to avoid dismemberment. Where are the U.N. reports? Where are the repetitive thread (Sample #1 Link) or (Sample #2 Link)? Where's the outrage? Why is one left-wing, but thankfully balanced New York Times reporter the only one taking up the outcry? Worse, where's the U.N. on this? They're sending only a trickle of vaccines in since Sudan doesn't want these people vaccinated. This is ethnic cleansing and apartheid.

Moneys of that magnitude are inherently uncollectable.

I doubt that the average Greek understood the high-level machinations of the well-connected. Why do you think most aid to governments as well as loan proceeds goes down a rat-hole?