Well, it's only brighter if Laura got all the skid marks out.Secret Squirrel said:It's much better when you look on the brighter side of life....
Should we start getting worried?
- Thread starter Echo
- Start date
How can you get the skid marks out when you're continually sh*tting yourself while chuckling like a lemming on international t.v.??Transcend said:
Smells like roses to me!!
This is turning into more of a joke everyday. Now Israel are trying to draw Iran in, claiming they were the ones who kidnapped their soldiers, and Bush is pointing fingers at Syria.
Olmert has said it's not stopping 'unil Hezbollah disarm' which is a great unverifiable goal which allows him to continue this as long as he likes. Every Lebanese who picks up a gun will suddenly be Hezbollah the same way every Iraqi who is armed is an Insurgent or AQ.
This is simply naked murderous aggression with a fine layer of PR. I notice as normal the PR spin seems to be somewhat thicker in the US press.
Olmert has said it's not stopping 'unil Hezbollah disarm' which is a great unverifiable goal which allows him to continue this as long as he likes. Every Lebanese who picks up a gun will suddenly be Hezbollah the same way every Iraqi who is armed is an Insurgent or AQ.
This is simply naked murderous aggression with a fine layer of PR. I notice as normal the PR spin seems to be somewhat thicker in the US press.
Well, it seems you were right. We've now got 25 Israeli dead as opposed to 24 yesterday (One civilian died as a result of apparantly 700 new rockets fired into Israel) but the Lebanese death toll is now "More than 250" with about 15, a tiny number of actual Hezbollah in that figure.Secret Squirrel said:
So as of today it seems that extra 1 Israeli is apparantly worth over 70 Lebanese civilians.
Israel have also started hitting regular Lebanese army barracks because... er well I'm not sure really.
Oh and just so y'all don't forget, the situation in Iraq is looking GREAT! There's been a large rise in civilian deaths in the last two months with over 6000 killed even according to US figures.
Dude, Iraq is all sorted out. They voted. It's turned back into the garden of Eden. The only reason we still have troops there is that they like it so much they don't want to leave.Changleen said:
regardless, the sinai return was a cornerpiece for peace.rockwool said:
i´d really rather do the reading thing....
i tend to prefer readings from .edu sites, rather than theatrical releases from "Arab Film Distribution is handling the theatrical distribution of Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land.".
a step forwards were the geneva conventions..rockwool said:
2 step backwards is abusing the cover it confers to put barbarism again in the spotlight.
what do you mean by that, that no targets taking civilian form???
what about launching attacks from civilian areas, and engaging in combat while camouflaging among civilians, and flat out use delusive tactics... what about sometimes approaching a target dressed as a civilian and then blowing up in pieces with your pouch of nails???
thats exactly what am arguing against. of course by current conventions that should not happen.
but thats one of the reasons why guerrilla warfare (aka more deaths) happen and are so favoured.
thats again, what am arguing against.
what happens when civilians are everywhere?
what happens when human-shields start to become the signature strategy exactly for the same ideal that pushed for their extintion?????
what happens them? is mankind (not israel alone) better off, by having hordes of guerrilla fighters human-shielded???
is that any better than guerilla fighters NOT using those tactics because deterrance once again would be enough (assuming minimally rational actors that is).
the bear would have the upper hand if he wore a suit made out of 10 month old breathing babies.
THAT IS EXACTLY MY POINT!!!!!
israel CANT, israel does not engage in the same level of guerilla warfare as the arab terrorists.
if israel made it a established policy (pretty much like terrorists), all hell would break loose. (which is a nice twist from the current "i´ll-look-somewhere-else" attitude towards the side who exploits that).
define legality please. and define the legal status of a UN recommendation please.
and remember what happened with resolution 3379....
would make no difference. arabs have been pwn3d fair and square (not so actually, even outnumbering israel by 8 to1) before in 48, 67 and 73...
yet that did not make them abandon guerrilla warfare...
besides the undeniable relativism (i´m pretty sure you value your wife/mom/son more than some starving ethiopian dying as we type)
are you sure????
who´d you rather see death? civilians or soldiers, regardless of side?
i dont deny there is a morality besides law, or a morality that superposes law.
in fact, i have an issue with current laws and customary practices, that have enabled a bunchs of psychos to resort to institutionalized practices mankind had long forgotten.
we have placed ourselves in a place where we can no longer deal with those whackos by anything other than asking pretty please. those limitations, well intented, coded in rules of engagement and geneva conventions, contributed to certain groups resorting back to barbarism.
in a very sad way, it calls for violence to end violence, even though is a very cold and nasty thing to say.
wait, wait.... Sweden has a military???
N8 said:wait, wait.... Sweden has a military???
Pretty damm good one, hense neither germany nor russia being keen about taking them on during WW2.
Don't worry. Condi will be over at the end of the week to fix things.
Not sure what she's doing right now...must be something really important. Vital, even.
Colin Powell, why hast thou forsaken us?
Not sure what she's doing right now...must be something really important. Vital, even.
Colin Powell, why hast thou forsaken us?
Is she gonna go over and yap at Hizbollah/Israel like the annoying poodle/lap dog that she is?Silver said:
She's probably shopping for that perfect pair of shoes. You can't end a ME conflict without the perfect shoes.Silver said:
Qana, southern Lebanon - It was a massacre. Not since Sabra and Chatila had I seen the innocent slaughtered like this. The Lebanese refugee women and children and men lay in heaps, their hands or arms or legs missing, beheaded or disembowelled. There were well over a hundred of them. A baby lay without a head. The Israeli shells had scythed through them as they lay.
In front of a burning building a girl held a corpse in her arms, the body of a grey- haired man whose eyes were staring at her, and she rocked the corpse back and forth in her arms, keening and weeping and crying the same words over and over: "My father, my father." A man stood amid a sea of bodies and, without saying a word, held aloft the body of a headless child.
"The Israelis have just told us they'll stop shelling the area,a re we supposed to thank them?" In the remains of a burning building a pile of corpses was burning. The roof had crashed in flames onto their bodies, cremating them in front of my eyes. When I walked towards them, I slipped on a human hand...
Israel's slaughter of civilians in this terrible 10-day offensive - 206 by last night - has been so cavalier, so ferocious, that not a Lebanese will forgive this massacre. There had been the ambulance attacked on Saturday, the sisters killed in Yohmor the day before, the 2-year-old girl decapitated by an Israeli missile four days ago. And earlier yesterday, the Israelis had slaughtered a family of 12 - the youngest was a four- day-old baby - when Israeli helicopter pilots fired missiles into their home.
Shortly afterwards, three Israeli jets dropped bombs only 250 metres from a convoy on which I was travelling, blasting a house 30 feet into the air in front of my eyes. Travelling back to Beirut to file my report on the massacre to the Independent last night, I found two Israeli gunboats firing at the civilian cars on the river bridge north of Sidon.
Every foreign army comes to grief in Lebanon. The Sabra and Chatila massacre of Palestinians by Israel's militia allies in 1982 doomed Israel's 1982 invasion. Now the Israelis are stained again by the bloodbath at Qana, the scruffy little Lebanese hill town where the Lebanese believe Jesus turned water into wine.
The Israeli Prime Minister may now wish to end this war. But the Hizbollah are not likely to let him. Israel is back in the Lebanese quagmire. Nor will the Arab world forget yesterday'a terrible scenes.
The blood of all the refugees ran quite literally in streams from the shell-smashed restaurant in which the Shiite Muslims from the hill villages of southern Lebanon - who had heeded Israel's order to leave their homes - had pathetically sought shelter.
The US President has allied himself with Israel in its war against "terrorism" and the Lebanese, in their grief, had not forgotten this. Israel's official expression of sorrow was rubbing salt in their wounds. "I would like to be made into a bomb and blow myself up amid the Israelis," one old man said.
As for the Hizbollah, which has repeatedly promised that Israelis will pay for their killing of Lebanese civilians, its revenge cannot be long in coming.
In front of a burning building a girl held a corpse in her arms, the body of a grey- haired man whose eyes were staring at her, and she rocked the corpse back and forth in her arms, keening and weeping and crying the same words over and over: "My father, my father." A man stood amid a sea of bodies and, without saying a word, held aloft the body of a headless child.
"The Israelis have just told us they'll stop shelling the area,a re we supposed to thank them?" In the remains of a burning building a pile of corpses was burning. The roof had crashed in flames onto their bodies, cremating them in front of my eyes. When I walked towards them, I slipped on a human hand...
Israel's slaughter of civilians in this terrible 10-day offensive - 206 by last night - has been so cavalier, so ferocious, that not a Lebanese will forgive this massacre. There had been the ambulance attacked on Saturday, the sisters killed in Yohmor the day before, the 2-year-old girl decapitated by an Israeli missile four days ago. And earlier yesterday, the Israelis had slaughtered a family of 12 - the youngest was a four- day-old baby - when Israeli helicopter pilots fired missiles into their home.
Shortly afterwards, three Israeli jets dropped bombs only 250 metres from a convoy on which I was travelling, blasting a house 30 feet into the air in front of my eyes. Travelling back to Beirut to file my report on the massacre to the Independent last night, I found two Israeli gunboats firing at the civilian cars on the river bridge north of Sidon.
Every foreign army comes to grief in Lebanon. The Sabra and Chatila massacre of Palestinians by Israel's militia allies in 1982 doomed Israel's 1982 invasion. Now the Israelis are stained again by the bloodbath at Qana, the scruffy little Lebanese hill town where the Lebanese believe Jesus turned water into wine.
The Israeli Prime Minister may now wish to end this war. But the Hizbollah are not likely to let him. Israel is back in the Lebanese quagmire. Nor will the Arab world forget yesterday'a terrible scenes.
The blood of all the refugees ran quite literally in streams from the shell-smashed restaurant in which the Shiite Muslims from the hill villages of southern Lebanon - who had heeded Israel's order to leave their homes - had pathetically sought shelter.
The US President has allied himself with Israel in its war against "terrorism" and the Lebanese, in their grief, had not forgotten this. Israel's official expression of sorrow was rubbing salt in their wounds. "I would like to be made into a bomb and blow myself up amid the Israelis," one old man said.
As for the Hizbollah, which has repeatedly promised that Israelis will pay for their killing of Lebanese civilians, its revenge cannot be long in coming.
"Condoleeza Rice is nice, but I prefer O'Rooney, that man on the TV who speaks to the dead, you know that man's a phoney, everybody move to Canada smoke a lots of pot, everybody move to Canada right now, here's how we do it, bum rush the fort and God before He and His dog ever knew it" -Clutch
Not that it matters....but Fluff....who was that from?? Obviously an embedded reporter....
Robert Fisk.Secret Squirrel said:
More details to follow.
Great, the Vichy government of Iraq is wielding its democratic powers.Changleen said:
Only 1! Israeli civilian killed when a whole 700 MLRS type artillery rockets have been fired into a city? Thats about the luckiest **** I've ever heard of! I don't have a TV but has someone else seen any damage done to Haifa on TV? Pretty big parts of that city must look like Beirut right now..
This whole kidnapping story will later show to be just an excuse to a story we've just began to read the prologue of..Changleen said:
A nice tactic the nazis wish they had thought of back in the dayz.Silver said:
Look what I found in the hand book for evil empires: "For a nice democratic election under occupation, make sure to only allow parties that are "friendlies"."
Seriously?rockwool said:
300 lebanese civilians killed so far and like 30 hezbollah soldiers, wtf
if israel wants to destroy hezbollah why dont they just attack them directly.
Blowing up electric generators, gaz reserves whats the purpose!!
And then they ask the lebanese army to dismantle hezbollah that would plunge lebanon into civil war.
hezbollah ounce defended lebanon from invading israel, but now there corrupt and should be removed but what israel is asking of the lebanese gov. is just not realistic.
if israel wants to destroy hezbollah why dont they just attack them directly.
Blowing up electric generators, gaz reserves whats the purpose!!
And then they ask the lebanese army to dismantle hezbollah that would plunge lebanon into civil war.
hezbollah ounce defended lebanon from invading israel, but now there corrupt and should be removed but what israel is asking of the lebanese gov. is just not realistic.
DaveW said:
Perhaps there was nothing there worth taking..???
Well that would certainly explain why they never attacked mainland America! No one in Germany needed any trailer parks or bad weeping mortar.N8 said:
N8 said:
heh how can you not have seen any "Swedish videos"............:heart: :heart:
DaveW said:
I guess there is always Seka...
Sure it was. But if the aid was that insignificant to peace, the US would hardly still be paying them of after all those years.ALEXIS_DH said:
It's good that you read. But you watch the news every now and then don't you. Maybe a televised documentary every now and then too? Well I hope you are. I do even though mainstream media is biased towards "the wicked side".
Dismissing a form of medium as somthing that only is suitable for recreational use and uphoding another as better just because its typed, is a conclusion that is too simplified.
What ever your prefered medium of information is, it is imperative that you have different sources of information that have an opposite stand on things, so that you, your selfe, can reflect and later come to a conclussion of your own and not accepting having one handed to you by the "side" you prefer.
I find it remarkable that you, who seem to be an educated person, dismiss something without having heard its content. Imagine a jury not listening to a person because of them beeing judgemental about the way he looks..
If you have a documentary that give facts to your point of view, please share it.
Dubya = George W. Bush.rockwool said:
about "mainstream media".rockwool said:
i live in peru. i dont watch much local tv/news. it just feeds my misanthropy, and makes me wonder why god wastes so many good lightinings on trees...
the few local news i watch can be considered factual statements reports and impartial or, if anything, a bit pro-arab and anti-us.. (the national median/average being quite towards anti-us, anti-israel, i suspect way more than northern europe). so by my background, you can say people around here hate the US and israel by proxy.
i get most of my news from cnn, the international version for the most (i can say its pro-israel). the spanish version is considerably more symphatetic to the arab perspective. i watch bbc ocassionaly.
but i get the most information by reading, i read the nyt, and the only 2 local papers worth a reading (can say they are pro-us), one of them carries a editorial and world pages from the wsj.
sometimes i read haaretz, lately i´ve been reading a few lebanese newspapers...
about the middle east i´ve read a good chunk of the jewish virtual library (you can say its biased, but at least tends to be factual and well documented). i´ve read a few differente pro-palestinian seemingly serious sites, but besides the sympathy i have for their suffering, most of those sites are appeal to shock and are hardly worth of a read from an educational pov. wikipedia has been a good resource too...
i read a lot... my job gets very slow at times, so reading is a good passtime.
sorry but i dont know any recomendable documentary.
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/international/ticker/detail/UN_rights_head_sees_possible_Mideast_war_crimes.html?siteSect=143&sid=6907991&cKey=1153357724000
Surely most reasonable humans must be finding Israel's actions unnacceptable by now.
changleen..
let put up this scenario.
lets say 10 times more people died, and the infraestructure cost was 10 times higher.
assuming rational actors, from now on, do you think hezbollah will be equally trigger happy? would the general lebanese population be equally sympathetic and permisive towards hezbollah´s trigger happiness? and more importantly, would a new non-extremist lebanese government be equally permisive to hezbollah actions in the south???
what about is the damage was 20-fold??
you can argue it just fuels anger against israel that will eventually turn into violence.
i know is icky, and its pretty sad to talk about stuff like this so coldly, but do you think there is a limit to how much damage inflicted into a population turns into violence against???
is it unlimited? or at some point resignation kicks in???
if you believe such limit exists, is the damage necesary to arrive at that limit justified if it can prevent further damage?? just think of how many people have died there in the last 10 years... we are talking thousands just in 10 years...
so being crude, is the death of 100 justified if it avoids the deaths of 150???
let put up this scenario.
lets say 10 times more people died, and the infraestructure cost was 10 times higher.
assuming rational actors, from now on, do you think hezbollah will be equally trigger happy? would the general lebanese population be equally sympathetic and permisive towards hezbollah´s trigger happiness? and more importantly, would a new non-extremist lebanese government be equally permisive to hezbollah actions in the south???
what about is the damage was 20-fold??
you can argue it just fuels anger against israel that will eventually turn into violence.
i know is icky, and its pretty sad to talk about stuff like this so coldly, but do you think there is a limit to how much damage inflicted into a population turns into violence against???
is it unlimited? or at some point resignation kicks in???
if you believe such limit exists, is the damage necesary to arrive at that limit justified if it can prevent further damage?? just think of how many people have died there in the last 10 years... we are talking thousands just in 10 years...
so being crude, is the death of 100 justified if it avoids the deaths of 150???
for all you frother haters...put this in your pipe and smoke it! its from a 'frother' that you so love to hate...
Where are the Christians?
When Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert unleashed his navy and air force on Lebanon, accusing that tiny nation of an "act of war," the last pillar of Bush's Middle East policy collapsed.
First came capitulation on the Bush Doctrine, as Pyongyang and Tehran defied Bush's dictum: The world's worst regimes will not be allowed to acquire the world's worst weapons. Then came suspension of the democracy crusade as Islamic militants exploited free elections to advance to power and office in Egypt, Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank, Iraq and Iran.
Now, Israel's rampage against a defenseless Lebanon smashing airport runways, fuel tanks, power plants, gas stations, lighthouses, bridges, roads and the occasional refugee convoy has exposed Bush's folly in subcontracting U.S. policy out to Tel Aviv, thus making Israel the custodian of our reputation and interests in the Middle East.
The Lebanon that Israel, with Bush's blessing, is smashing up has a pro-American government, heretofore considered a shining example of his democracy crusade. Yet, asked in St. Petersburg if he would urge Israel to use restraint in its airstrikes, Bush sounded less like the leader of the Free World than some bellicose city councilman from Brooklyn Heights.
What Israel is up to was described by its army chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, when he threatened to "turn back the clock in Lebanon 20 years."
Olmert seized upon Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers to unleash the IDF in a pre-planned attack to make the Lebanese people suffer until the Lebanese government disarms Hezbollah, a task the Israeli army could not accomplish in 18 years of occupation.
Israel is doing the same to the Palestinians. To punish these people for the crime of electing Hamas, Olmert imposed an economic blockade of Gaza and the West Bank and withheld the $50 million in monthly tax and customs receipts due the Palestinians.
Then, Israel instructed the United States to terminate all aid to the Palestinian Authority, though Bush himself had called for the elections and for the participation of Hamas. Our Crawford cowboy meekly complied.
The predictable result: Fatah and Hamas fell to fratricidal fighting, and Hamas militants began launching Qassam rockets over the fence from Gaza into Israel. Hamas then tunneled into Israel, killed two soldiers, captured one, took him back into Gaza and demanded a prisoner exchange.
Israel's response was to abduct half of the Palestinian cabinet and parliament and blow up a $50 million U.S.-insured power plant. That cut off electricity for half a million Palestinians. Their food spoiled, their water could not be purified, and their families sweltered in the summer heat of the Gaza desert. One family of seven was wiped out on a beach by what the IDF assures us was an errant artillery shell.
Let it be said: Israel has a right to defend herself, a right to counter-attack against Hezbollah and Hamas, a right to clean out bases from which Katyusha or Qassam rockets are being fired and a right to occupy land from which attacks are mounted on her people.
But what Israel is doing is imposing deliberate suffering on civilians, collective punishment on innocent people, to force them to do something they are powerless to do: disarm the gunmen among them. Such a policy violates international law and comports neither with our values nor our interests. It is un-American and un-Christian.
But where are the Christians? Why is Pope Benedict virtually alone among Christian leaders to have spoken out against what is being done to Lebanese Christians and Muslims?
When al-Qaida captured two U.S. soldiers and barbarically butchered them, the U.S. Army did not smash power plants across the Sunni Triangle. Why then is Bush not only silent but openly supportive when Israelis do this?
Democrats attack Bush for crimes of which he is not guilty, including Haditha and Abu Ghraib. Why are they, too, silent when Israel pursues a conscious policy of collective punishment of innocent peoples?
Britain's diplomatic goal in two world wars was to bring the naive cousins in, to "pull their chestnuts out of the fire." Israel and her paid and pro-bono agents here appear determined to expand the Iraq war into Syria and Iran, and have America fight and finish all of Israel's enemies.
That Tel Aviv is maneuvering us to fight its wars is understandable. That Americans are ignorant of, or complicit in this, is deplorable.
Already, Bush is ranting about Syria being behind the Hezbollah capture of the Israeli soldiers. But where is the proof?
Who is whispering in his ear? The same people who told him Iraq was maybe months away from an atom bomb, that an invasion would be a "cakewalk," that he would be Churchill, that U.S. troops would be greeted with candy and flowers, that democracy would break out across the region, that Palestinians and Israelis would then sit down and make peace?
How much must America pay for the education of this man?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51116
Where are the Christians?
When Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert unleashed his navy and air force on Lebanon, accusing that tiny nation of an "act of war," the last pillar of Bush's Middle East policy collapsed.
First came capitulation on the Bush Doctrine, as Pyongyang and Tehran defied Bush's dictum: The world's worst regimes will not be allowed to acquire the world's worst weapons. Then came suspension of the democracy crusade as Islamic militants exploited free elections to advance to power and office in Egypt, Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank, Iraq and Iran.
Now, Israel's rampage against a defenseless Lebanon smashing airport runways, fuel tanks, power plants, gas stations, lighthouses, bridges, roads and the occasional refugee convoy has exposed Bush's folly in subcontracting U.S. policy out to Tel Aviv, thus making Israel the custodian of our reputation and interests in the Middle East.
The Lebanon that Israel, with Bush's blessing, is smashing up has a pro-American government, heretofore considered a shining example of his democracy crusade. Yet, asked in St. Petersburg if he would urge Israel to use restraint in its airstrikes, Bush sounded less like the leader of the Free World than some bellicose city councilman from Brooklyn Heights.
What Israel is up to was described by its army chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, when he threatened to "turn back the clock in Lebanon 20 years."
Olmert seized upon Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers to unleash the IDF in a pre-planned attack to make the Lebanese people suffer until the Lebanese government disarms Hezbollah, a task the Israeli army could not accomplish in 18 years of occupation.
Israel is doing the same to the Palestinians. To punish these people for the crime of electing Hamas, Olmert imposed an economic blockade of Gaza and the West Bank and withheld the $50 million in monthly tax and customs receipts due the Palestinians.
Then, Israel instructed the United States to terminate all aid to the Palestinian Authority, though Bush himself had called for the elections and for the participation of Hamas. Our Crawford cowboy meekly complied.
The predictable result: Fatah and Hamas fell to fratricidal fighting, and Hamas militants began launching Qassam rockets over the fence from Gaza into Israel. Hamas then tunneled into Israel, killed two soldiers, captured one, took him back into Gaza and demanded a prisoner exchange.
Israel's response was to abduct half of the Palestinian cabinet and parliament and blow up a $50 million U.S.-insured power plant. That cut off electricity for half a million Palestinians. Their food spoiled, their water could not be purified, and their families sweltered in the summer heat of the Gaza desert. One family of seven was wiped out on a beach by what the IDF assures us was an errant artillery shell.
Let it be said: Israel has a right to defend herself, a right to counter-attack against Hezbollah and Hamas, a right to clean out bases from which Katyusha or Qassam rockets are being fired and a right to occupy land from which attacks are mounted on her people.
But what Israel is doing is imposing deliberate suffering on civilians, collective punishment on innocent people, to force them to do something they are powerless to do: disarm the gunmen among them. Such a policy violates international law and comports neither with our values nor our interests. It is un-American and un-Christian.
But where are the Christians? Why is Pope Benedict virtually alone among Christian leaders to have spoken out against what is being done to Lebanese Christians and Muslims?
When al-Qaida captured two U.S. soldiers and barbarically butchered them, the U.S. Army did not smash power plants across the Sunni Triangle. Why then is Bush not only silent but openly supportive when Israelis do this?
Democrats attack Bush for crimes of which he is not guilty, including Haditha and Abu Ghraib. Why are they, too, silent when Israel pursues a conscious policy of collective punishment of innocent peoples?
Britain's diplomatic goal in two world wars was to bring the naive cousins in, to "pull their chestnuts out of the fire." Israel and her paid and pro-bono agents here appear determined to expand the Iraq war into Syria and Iran, and have America fight and finish all of Israel's enemies.
That Tel Aviv is maneuvering us to fight its wars is understandable. That Americans are ignorant of, or complicit in this, is deplorable.
Already, Bush is ranting about Syria being behind the Hezbollah capture of the Israeli soldiers. But where is the proof?
Who is whispering in his ear? The same people who told him Iraq was maybe months away from an atom bomb, that an invasion would be a "cakewalk," that he would be Churchill, that U.S. troops would be greeted with candy and flowers, that democracy would break out across the region, that Palestinians and Israelis would then sit down and make peace?
How much must America pay for the education of this man?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51116
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161496ridetoofast said:
That incident was in 1996.fluff said:
ridetoofast said:
He's nuttier than Ross Periot!
New media catch phrase with respect to Israel:
"collective punishment"
"collective punishment"
rockwool said:
Yup, it's how we pronounce it here in the nukulur age.rockwool said: