kuzadd

Mckenna has 'anger issues' is all. lol or he has been paying attention, to what has been going on, more likely.

Other then the US, who has long had oil concerns there, as part of their "national security" going back a number of yrs. Britian, ditto, who also has oil concerns there. Then Israel, who has oil, water, and expansionism aspirations.

Not in so many words, but its implied, just as the left appears to want the U.S. to fail. There is no other explanation for not wanting or expecting Israel to defend itself. Many on the left seem to regard Israel as the cutting edge of evil while supporting Palestinion or other Arab aggression and attacks. Holy assumptions batman, scriblett is on the run! It's implied?? It is implied nowhere, by anyone. Who is the "left" " anyone that doesn't mindlessly, without a independant rational thought, support the US and Israel. If the US and Israel fail, they will fail because of their own overzealousness, or overextension, but they will fail through there own actions and policies, not because of any 'wishful thinking'. Is this more imputing?

So? Does that mean Buddhism is not a religion because there is no requirement to believe in a deity? Yes. The imagery is simply a way of conveying a message regarding the nature of the universe. The message is basically the same even if the imagery is different. Many of the more thoughtful followers of major religions recognize this. That is the driving force behind the various interfaith dialogues that go on today. ahhh, noticed you ignored this.... I'll repeat I said "Excuse me, but Jesus, is the reason for Christianity. Because a Christian is a follower of Christ , that is Jesus Christ,(external supernatural deity) so saying the symbolism or myths are irrelevant to the belief system, is quite a non-credible statement."

also being covered here http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle1867995.ece Diplomats suspected Entebbe hijacking was an Israeli plot to discredit the PLO Idi Amin co-operated with the hijackers and allowed the aircraft to land at Entebbe, where Israeli and Jewish passengers were kept hostage and others were freed. A week later, Israeli special forces stormed the airport and freed the passengers, in an assault that claimed the lives of three hostages, one Israeli soldier, forty-five Ugandan soldiers and six hijackers. Four days previously, Mr Colvin had written a confidential report, made public for the first time at the National Archives today, in which he outlined theories on the identity and motives of the hijackers. “A contact Euro-Arab Parliamentary association rang me on June 29 to say that . . . the hijack was the work of the PFLP, with help from the Israeli secret service, the Shin Beit. “The operation was designed to torpedo the Palestinian Liberation Organisation’s standing in France,” he wrote, referring to the organisation then headed by Yassir Arafat, “and to prevent what they see as a growing rapprochement between the PLO and the Americans . . . hence the unholy alliance of the hijacking”. There is no indication that the theory was taken further, but the suggestion of inter-Palestinian rivalries resurfaced days later, when a Foreign and Commonwealth Office official reported his discussions with the journalist Leo Murray. Murray said sources had said “the Entebbe hijacking had been planned by Wadia Hassad’s splinter group from the PFLP . . . to prevent the development of contacts between Arafat of the PLO and the West . . . The group were thinking of hijacking next an aircraft, perhaps on an internal European route.” These warnings were made as Britain came under diplomatic pressure to congratulate Israel on its raid, and struggled to determine the fate of Doris Bloch, a British-Israeli grandmother who was left behind by the mission and later went missing from hospital. Confidential telegrams report that staff had seen her being dragged away, screaming. Within a week she was presumed dead, and by the end of the month Britain had severed diplomatic ties with Amin’s regime. Interestingly was Israel willing to 'sacrifice' a few of her own citizens, for political gain?

can we say false flag operation, it looks that way?? Classic False flag.??? interesting indeed, and oh what a web we weave when we attempt to deceive??? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...1/nhijack01.xml "In extraordinary claim that Israeli intelligence may have had a hand in an airline hijacking before sending in commandos to rescue the hostages at Entebbe was made to the Foreign Office. we have a name, for the source and we have the source named. "He heard it from a contact in the Euro-Arab Parliamentary Association three days after the Air France flight from Tel Aviv to Paris was seized in mid-air by Palestinians and German terrorists on June 27, 1976. Mr Colvin told his superiors that his source suggested that the attack was carried out by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine with help from the Israeli Security Service, the Shin Bet. It was designed to torpedo the rival Palestine Liberation Organisation's standing in France and to prevent what they saw as a growing rapprochement between the PLO and the Americans. more names, and sources mentioned, and a legitimate reason to benefit Israel. An official noted: 'If, as Mr Murray's sources allege, the aim of the Entebbe hijacking was to prevent the development of relations between Arafat and the West, and Arafat knew this, it would provide another motive for Arafat's recent approach to the French in Cairo warning us of further attacks.'' "Most of the file from that National Security archives Is taken up with Foreign Office attempts to distance itself from the Israeli raid" Frank Wheeler, the first secretary, reported that there was abundant evidence of Ugandan collaboration with the hijackers. Palestinians had been brought from Mogadishu in President Amin's private jet to join the hijackers, according to the file." editted to include link,as I forgot the first time around! sorry.

More of the famous imputing. Nobody here has said they want Israel to fall. You are like Chicken Little. Don't you wonder what the heck the 'suicide pact' is? Don't you wonder who here was 'agitiating' for a one state solution? Higgly, don't you wonder where, these types of silly statements ever find there origins? Where do they come from?

except the "belief system" for an atheist includes NO external supernatural force or deity. Where as, for a Christian, it is an absolute requirement. "The symbolism and myths used to rationalize the belief system are completely irrelevant." This is an incredible statement , so you are saying, that Jesus, God, Allah or what/whom ever are completely irrelevant to there specific religions. Excuse me, but Jesus, is the reason for Christianity. Because a Christian is a follower of Christ , that is Jesus Christ,(external supernatural deity) so saying the symbolism or myths are irrelevant to the belief system, is quite a non-credible statement.

I appreciate your point, but I don't think it is meaningful to state that atheists "worship". That butchers the language. anyone can 'worship' anything? worship: idolize: love unquestioningly and uncritically or to excess; venerate as an idol; I find my mind wandering upon gazing at the handsome Johnny Depp, is it worship, or something darker? Dunno? My 'worship' of Johnny Depp has nothing to do with the supernatural or the divine deity. the point was more the worshipping of the external supernatural or divine deity. with deity: atheists don't do that.

OK. Is China engaged in "illegal" activites by packing Tibet with people of Chinese extraction? I cannot understand the view of so many that heads the Jewish inhabitants of the land of Israel lose, tails the fighters, jihadis and warriors win. What do fighters, jihadis and warriors contribute to the world's welfare? Why is Israel being held to a standard that other nations cannot, and will not ever, hold themselves to? The "Geneva Conventions" were apparently an attempt by politicians to prevent the series of wars that preceded it, WW I and WW II. While well-intentioned, no nation will treat such international law as a suicide pact. "I cannot understand the view of so many that heads the Jewish inhabitants of the land of Israel lose, tails the fighters, jihadis and warriors win. What do fighters, jihadis and warriors contribute to the world's welfare? Why is Israel being held to a standard that other nations cannot, and will not ever, hold themselves to" perhaps because you only look at situations in such a manner as quoted, that you cannot grasp any other views? Inc. the one in the article posted from Theodor Meron, the Israeli Foreign Ministry's legal adviser at the time and today one of the world's leading international jurists, sounds to me like he is informed, knowledgable, etc., he clearly hasn't changed his mind in all this time. His declaration is "a serious blow to Israel's persistent argument that the settlements do not violate international law, particularly as Israel prepares to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the war in June 1967." He infact informed the Israeli government from the get go that what was being done was illegal. BTW: I do not think the Geneva Conventions only goals we as you have stated, I think the intentions were far greater, far wider ranging, then just preventing wars.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle...icle2584164.ece Secret memo shows Israel knew Six Day War was illegal By Donald Macintyre Published: 26 May 2007 Judge Meron, president of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia until 2005, said that, after 40 years of Jewish settlement growth in the West Bank - one of the main problems to be solved in any peace deal: " I believe that I would have given the same opinion today." Despite the legal opinion, which was forwarded to Levi Eshkol, the Prime Minister, but not made public at the time, the Labour cabinet progressively sanctioned settlements. This paved the way to growth which has resulted in at least 240,000 Jewish settlers in the West Bank today. "The settlements made peacekeeping much more difficult", "one of the main problems" still today. Though Israel denies it is a occupation, it is, that what it is, it is an occupation, spinning it away, with fancy language, cannot change the fact Israel , knowingly, occupies Palestinian Land.

That is the 'golden rule' argument. But the 'golden rule' argument is not effective when you have groups of humans with the power to impose their will on others. A white slave owner does not fear being enslaved because only 'blacks' can be slaves according to the rules created by the society he lived in. These race based rules also protected that white non-slave owners. As a result, no white person in that society could justify opposing slavery simply in the name of self interest. That is why the opposition to slavery gad to came from outside the society and was imposed by people motivated by a belief in a higher moral order. I don't see a problem with making a case for human rights by appealing to a higher moral order. However, I think it is ridiculously hypocritical for self-styled atheists to claim that their belief system is substantially different from the belief system of any theist. actually it's not, except to you. but it is the logical basis of a number of geneva conventions, on prisoner treatment and torture, as an example. It comes first and foremost from the position that all human are equal, and goes from there. I do. What is a higher 'moral order'? is it easily corrupted, or free from corruption?? Is it rational? and yet it is, IMO for this one reason alone , they worship NO outside supernatural or divine deity/ies.

You have a right to disagree, but you obviously havn't read the rules about respecting other peoples opinions, just because you don't agree with a piece doesn't make it wrong, just because you say there's nothing factual or relevant doesn't make it so. I would also say that you bring nothing to the enjoyment of a discussion and are continully castigating people for their comments. Your opinion is not necessarily right or factual and I think in the interests of bringing the forum back to its former higher level, it would be best if I put you on ignore, and have done so. You bring nothing to the discussion other than besmirching other people's opinions, you need to look in a mirror. have a great day Promise? But, I WON'T put you on my ignore list, because, I can take a diversity of opinion, can handle reading it and do not require a closed sphere of influence. In other words, I don't need to keep my head buried in the sand. Apparently you do?

That is an assertion - not an argument. Why should one human sacrifice their immediate self interest to assist other humans? i.e. Why should the slave owner give up his slaves? The answer, is so simple, yet clear, it flew right over your head, that is not an assertation, that is a fact. "Human rights are in the self-interest of humans all the time, because we are ALL human's ,all of the time" Why should a slave owner, give up his slaves? because by enslaving others it is equally as easy for the slaveowner to be enslaved ( tablesturned) If we guarantee, as a human right freedom from slavery for all, it sure goes along way to ensuring we are not ourselves enslaved.

Exactly the same can be said about anything you post, pot - black get over yourself. You also might want to read the rules which you obviously are not aware of. BE POLITE AND RESPECT OTHERS Mapleleafweb operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way. Please respect others using this board and treat them with respect and dignity. NO TROLLING/FLAMING Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all. Some messages are not so much offensive as simply nuisance value. An example would be a person who persistently creates conflict without contributing anything useful. In newsgroup circles, such a person is known as a "troll". We define "trolling" as a message that serves no constructive purpose and is likely to cause offence or arguments. We define "annoying" as any message that results in a complaint from a registered user -- we will then decide whether to take action. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS Please respect others using this board by refraining from personal attacks. There is a huge difference between disagreeing with a thought or idea and attacking an individual. We encourage lively debate and intelligent critiques of others viewpoints, not tirades against another poster. I disagree, there is no pot calling kettle black, and you back my claims up with the fact, that you bring nothing factual, nor relevant, to add to the enjoyment of the discussion, by bringing the rules of the forum up, the very forum rules, you fail to go by. I launched no personal attack, there was no name calling, or smear, I stated matter of factly, the piece was an obvious propoganda piece and it was, it contained absolutley NOTHING but aspersions and conjecture, and you failed to recognize that. Join me in the other thread, where we can discuss the obvious nonsense in the piece. Then you could explain how you were promoting ,from the forum rules, "promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. Really? With that piece in particular?

Sounds like a rehash of the golden rule argument to me. You don't explain why human rights are in the self interest of every human all of the time. In fact, you cannot make such a claim unless you appeal to some higher notion of humanity which more important than the desires of the individual (i.e. turn 'humanity' into a deity).Simply appealing to self interest is not sufficient because the are many situations where treating other humans humanely is _not_ in the the self interest of some groups. For example, the owners of the plantations benefited from the system of slavery and had no fear of being enslaved themselves. Ending slavery was most definitely not in their self interest. Furthermore, the white soldiers from the north that marched to their deaths trying end the practice also derived zero benefit from 'human rights' for blacks. "You don't explain why human rights are in the self interest of every human all of the time." Human rights are in the self-interest of humans all the time, because we are ALL human's ,all of the time see it's as simple as that!!!!!!!!!!

Actually, the case of distortions lies firmly on the side of the apologists for terrorism gang - - but don't let facts get in the way, just believe your one 'claptrap' and yet, have you presented anything historically accurate, or actually even remotely accurate, to add to and embellish the forums discussion? I mean that piece, you posted, wrt iran was utter garbage. You clearly didn't let any facts get in the way, I mean it was quite laughable. One would hope you would be a little more cognizant of a piece of propoganda, meant to appeal to emotion and cause fear and irrationality, but, still, it appears you are not. or that you would have actually read it? Apparently you learned nothing from the Iraq debacle, despite, the obvious facts? cognizant: * aware(p): (sometimes followed by `of') having or showing knowledge or understanding or realization or perception;

not only were they brave Afghans ,at that time, fighting there Invaders,, the West armed and trained them, the mujahadeen to fight USSR, which was ok! BUT, now, they are bad, for fighting against their Invaders what has changed? the 'brand' of occupiers. what of the Afghans? The Afghans are still in their OWN country, fighting the occupiers

I thought he was a pretty logical fellow too, it seems to, just make sense.

They all do it. Name calling, smearing. If we were identified by our actual names here, a libel lawyer could have a field day with the pro-Israel gang. That thought has crossed my mind so many times! and isn't it lucky for them?! I wouldn't hesitate for a second, for as much money as I could get, either.

I think anyone can spot the distortions by those who hate Israel too, not to mention their exaggerations and misrepresentations. This is a case of pot - black actually the case of distortions , lies firmly on the side of the 'Israelonly' gang, who seem to only use , 'exaggerations and misrepresentations,' to distort, lie, contort and generally revise , history. Then when confronted with the work of a historian or some actual documentation, the 'Israelonly' gang resorts to name calling/smear, constantly displaying the weakness, in their own 'arguements'. If one can call irrational claptrap, an arguement?

religion defintion: * a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; "he lost his faith but not his morality" * an institution to express belief in a divine power; "he was raised in the Baptist religion"; " NOTE: these defintions seperate religion and morality, as they well should be seperated as religion construes no morality , necessarily. IMO, these are good basic defintions of religion. thought I would throw that in! thought on the defintions? editted to add: an afterthought! some posters are classifying a belief system as religion, this IMO, is false. Belief systems are so personal they can in no way be construed as a religion, or religious belief. Religion requires a belief in some external supernatural or divine power, or some sort of dependance on an external institution,( a church, the building or the church, the entity,) in which to express that said belief. whereas a personal belief system, relies on no such externalites, as necessary to express said belief. dish?

defintely a man!

That doesn't pass the sniff test. Which lefties did that, where, and when? (Please provide sources.) figleaf, you are a glutton for punishment, no? " first the Lefties emptied all the crazy people out of the nut wards," when I see, such an utter display of ignorance, and nastiness towards the mentally ill and there extended families , which is horrendous. who go through hell, BTW. when in fact if | recall correctly it was Mike Harris, that emptied the psychiatric ward????? it's not worthy, but, you, I hope will have fun with it! Cause that's all it's worth, ridicule. Throw in a dose of contempt. IMO, though waste of time.

well if I have to be lumped in with anyone? Better you , then many other's that come to mind. But, don't you wonder, why do posters insist on this lumping together, to keep everything neat and tidy for themselves, why can't the just accept the messy beauty of us all as individuals???