Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Thank you
For your tiny
Little narrow view....
in glenn's twisted world. al queda is hamas is Israel is America. None is better than the other. None aspires to more than the other. None benefits the human race more than the other.
What a horrible, frightening place the world must be for glenn.
What would you do if people made the same baseless and completely inappropriate comparison dozens of times a day, as if they knew nothing of history or even current events?-- omooex
Actually it was a very good analogy. And you're making the same argument people here do that think prior possession is meaningful. To which I say, if you really believe that, hand over the keys to your house to the nearest indigenous person.
The journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step. Until the Palestinians recognize the right of the Israelis to exist, they die. It's just that simple. Personally, I'd prefer they partnered up with the Israelis and seek peace and prosperity. But that's just me.
First Gary Kamiya, now Mr. Greenwald. Without picking apart the logic behind the post, to call Tom Friedman a "Zionist apologist" is without any support.
What is it about this topic especially that makes people think they can not only attribute to you ideas you never advocated, but even put quotes around things that you never remotely said?
And say whatever you want about the arguments I made here, but I think it's a bit much -- even for this topic -- to claim that all I did was call Tom Friedman names without analyzing his "logic" in this column.
Legally, under the rule of war, it owns all the land it conquered in a war in which Arab states were the aggressors
The "rule of war?" Can you quote this "law," since you identified it as such?
Would hundreds of pies in his face have a similarly "defeating" effect on Friedman? Or, more likely, would he become even more radicalized against his critics on the left?
I suspect the latter.
For anyone who missed the previous instance, here's a link to a video:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/24/thomas-friedman-pie-in-th_n_98367.html
I hate to belabor the point, but there really is something terribly asymmetric about Friedman promoting so much bloodshed when the worst he has had to fear in response is the "terror" of a bit of meringue or shaving cream in his face.
"Territory it does not own?" What might that be? Legally, under the rule of war, it owns all the land it conquered in a war in which Arab states were the aggressors.
Er, what rule of war would that be?
And no, Israel was the aggressor. They started the 1967 war in 1965. Look it up.
Why must Israel give back territory so that new attacks can be made across Israel's now 9-mile width? Withdrawal only comes with peace.
But peace only comes when supporters of Israel like yourself stop consuming the mainstream media version of history, and stop assuming that granting concessions will inevitably lead to further attacks?
How can you talk like that and pretend to desire peace?
"All the more reason not to have Gaza be part of the eventual Palestinian state. "
If I control your movement, then you cannot move freely.
Therefore, you cannot be part of the Palestinian state in the West Bank, because you cannot get there.
Brilliant reasoning.
What did you say?
OTOH the desire to kill is overwhelmingly Palestinian.
That's what I was responding to. And it's clearly not true.
Smarter people would recognize reality, however unfair it may seem, and build a future for themselves and their children.
Yes, that's almost a foregone conclusion, isn't it, given Israeli "willingness" to help it come to fruition.
You depress me utterly and I'm going to stop responding to you (until I forget my oath, which happens quite often when I get upset).
The war is being largely cast as Israel vs. Hamas, the Israeli invasion of Gaza. My point is that the framework has narrowed from a region-wide "Arab-Israeli" conflict to an Israeli-Palestinian one, and in this instance, more specifically, Israel-Hamas.
Consider that a few years back, the Saudis offered to broker an Arab League wide peace plan. (Which our dumbass government refused to even consider in favor of giving Israel free rein.) Egypt certainly isn't opening their border crossing w/ the Palestinians in a show of solidarity, although they must have some complicity in the operation of the tunnels.
Maybe that is part of Israel's motivation - an attempt to isolate Hamas. Maybe it's related to the Israeli election, as someone suggested. Maybe the Israeli's feel they just don't know what they are really going to get come Obama time, and they figured they better do this now. I don't know.
But it is an interesting and I think an important change in the framework. We'll see how it plays out in terms of the Arab "street" versu the various governments.
You don't have to keep making the same point over and over.-- CronenBurgerMeister
As long as you, Glenn, and the rest of the bittoheads here are enabling the Palestinians to commit war and death, I'm going to point out the stupidity of it. Especially when the conflict is around whether the people you've provoked into war have the right to exist. That is truly stupid. Stop it.
...in glenn's twisted world. al queda is hamas is Israel is America. None is better than the other. None aspires to more than the other. None benefits the human race more than the other.
It's simple, genius. Fundamentalism is fundamentalism. Israelis launching hundreds of bombs into civilian neighborhoods, hoping to kill one or two radical arab leaders is murder. Plain & simple.
I know it's a tough concept for some to understand.
which you [shooter242] clearly believe.
-- CronenBurgerMeister
That's where you went wrong before, and now again. Shooter doesn't 'clearly believe' anything. He is simply about being contrary. If for some reason Glenn Greenwald decided to post about outlawing Leaf Blowers being used before the hours between day break and ten AM, Shooter242 would - like a robot - argue all day long about it and call Glenn, and anyone on here who agreed with Glenn, Fascist. Shooter242 is an empty shell.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
