Little Green Footballs

Monday, March 17, 2008

From the comfort of their homes

Charles is boiling in rage about a Daily Kos diary talking about how America needs to feel the damage inflicted on Iraq by getting "invaded" and "occupied".

It should be noted that LGF Watch doesn't support the idea that America should be invaded or occupied, however the reactions at the little green loony bin are just rich:

#12 looking closely
I hear Al Queda in Iraq is still looking for recruits.
Maybe this diarist ought to volunteer.

To address the thin gruel of his post, the Iraqis *WANT* the US military to be there. So why should we leave?
Actually, no. They don't.
#16 Bubblehead II
re: #4 phoenixgirl

Mexico. It's already happening, The invasion, the war torn streets, the destruction of entire neighborhoods, ect.
Of course it's totally obvious that the destruction those darn mexicuns are causing all over America, even in a neighborhood near you, is legitimately comparable with the carpet-bombing of Iraqi cities during the invasion, in which a few tens of thousands have died, especially that loads of Mexicans are productive members of American society and taking up jobs that even the lizardoid army would refuse to do. Can I get a "Nuke Mexico!" now?
#30 galloping granny
re: #17 JamesTKirk

Can we start with Berkeley?

As far as I am concerned, anyone who wants Berkeley is welcome to it. Glad to hand it over. Might even pay somebody to take it. What a waste of oxygen that crew is. They spout enough hot air to be responsible for "global warming" all by themselves!
No comment needed.
#50 zmdavid
We need someone to come, kill all the violent terrorists in our country and rebuild our infrastructure at no cost to us?
I'm all for it.
Great, and I'm sure that the millions of Iraqi civilians who have lost innocent family members and are leading this kind of dandy life regard all of that as "no cost". Nice, eh?
#67 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey
We don't know what it's like to be in a war zone, prick? There were war zones in lower Manhattan, the Pentagon and over the skies of Pennsylvania on 9/11/01. Just don't question their patriotism.
/SPIT
Sure, 9/11 was bad enough, but comparing this one-time incident with a since-5-years-unresolved and ongoing conflict that has taken a few hundred-fold more lives and a much greater toll on the lives of the remaining population is a bit dishonest, no?
Now, in response to the Berkeley remark:
#77 samsgran1948
re: #30 galloping granny

But you need to make sure that the People's Republic of San Francisco is included with Berkeley.
.. and don't you dare call them racist!

And on and on it goes. It's not as if they were really opposed to the Iraq war either. Deskchair warrior-ism at its best!

33 comments:

Tex Taylor said...

Sure, 9/11 was bad enough, but comparing this one-time incident with a since-5-years-unresolved and ongoing conflict that has taken a few hundred-fold more lives and a much greater toll on the lives of the remaining population is a bit dishonest, no?

Did you loons here on LGF Watch catch the tacit minimization of the tragedy called 9/11 by the guest host Sphinxter? More people were killed by the attack on 9/11 than Pearl Harbor, but hey there's worse things!

Most of you clowns are as blind to Sphinxter's American hating as you were to Obama's racist church.

And Sphinxter for you: We toasted about 200,000 Japanese for less than 9/11. You would do well to remember that.

Queen O'Danile said...

What a GREAT service you are doing for humanity--and providing comic relief as well....must be fun to monitor idiots!

Anonymous said...

how can you attack Sphinx for 'minimization'? He merely pointed out that compared to the anarchy and mass murder unleashed in Iraq that the bodycount is significantly less. Is this not fact?

As for 'toasting' 200,000 Japanese for less than 9/11. The difference being that Japan attacked the US, Iraq didn't.

The Sphinx is right, comparing 9/11 to the Iraq War is dishonest.

The Sphinx said...

"Did you loons here on LGF Watch catch the tacit minimization of the tragedy called 9/11 by the guest host Sphinxter? More people were killed by the attack on 9/11 than Pearl Harbor, but hey there's worse things!"

Nobody has denied that 9/11 wasn't really that bad. Of course it was terrible. But if you really think that 9/11 was the worst tragedy to hit humanity, then you're just either ragingly dishonest, or painfully blind.

"Most of you clowns are as blind to Sphinxter's American hating as you were to Obama's racist church."

Keep on raving Tex. Keep on raving.

"And Sphinxter for you: We toasted about 200,000 Japanese for less than 9/11. You would do well to remember that."

I never thought that would be something one could be proud of and boast about. Says a lot about how much you care for human life.

Dealer said...

...and comparing 9/11 to Pearl Harbour to justify the Iraq War is equally dishonest. Not that it stops every wingnut keyboard commando doing it.

WCW said...

9/11, as horrible as it was, is the wingnut's pet tragedy.

The Sphinx said...

"Nobody has denied that 9/11 wasn't really that bad"

OOPS, sorry about that. What I meant was "Nobody has CLAIMED 9/11 wasn't really that bad".

My apologies. Sometimes I should proof-read my own comments.

Red Tulips said...

Sphinx,

When you are attacked, you fight back.

Do you really believe one person should be killed for every person killed? Is that 'proportional' to you?

So I ask you...

The World Trade Center and Pentagon was blown up.

Would it have been 'proportional' to then blow up the Iranian parliament and financial centers in Tehran, killing and wounding the same numbers of civilians?

According to you, that is totally justified!

Do you not see the insane illogic of claiming 'proportionality'? It is the most idiotic and insane arguments I have ever seen.

It literally means that in response to terror aimed at civilians, there should be Arab civilian purposely mass murdered. For instance, according to your 'proportionality' claim, it would have been justified for the IDF to walk into a mosque, after the Mercaz yeshiva massacre, and mass murder 8 mosque goers, and wounder another 10. That would have been perfectly 'proportional.' According to you, you should not actually go after jihadists, but you should 'proportionally' attack civilians, purposely.

This is the insane world you are justifying.

But I will go one step further, that also means jihadists always win, as they call the shots. They always get to strike first, and the only thing the US or Israel or 'the West' can do is react.

Shocking and inhumane policy you believe in.

Rancher said...

Can’t get on LGF so I came here. How come I never make the highlight reel?

V said...

9/11, as horrible as it was, is the wingnut's pet tragedy.

Indeed.

The Sphinx said...

RT, alright, let's recap a bit on your logic:

If some terrorists kill themselves and take the lives of many civilians with them, then it's just perfectly ok to unleash all your firepower and attack whatever country you don't like in a complete sawed-off-shotgun manner, without caring about killing civilians there, let alone killing hundreds of times more civilians than you have lost.

The question is: How does this make you any better than terrorists? (Hint: It doesn't)

Your problem is, you set the clock back to zero as soon as the other side attacks and thus wipe off any guilt that the side you support is carrying. Otherwise you wouldn't have forgotten, that very shortly before the tragic attacks on the school in Jerusalem happened, there were about 120 Gazans murdered by the IDF, many of them children (i.e. a state-controlled act of terrorism). But do you care? Well hardly..

To show what kind of irrational thinking goes through that thick head of yours: You suggested attacking Iran straigt after 9/11 even though Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. None of the hijackers were Iranian, and the current Iranian Government didn't exist by then. So yes, such an attack would have been an unprovoked act of terrorism.

The Sphinx said...

Add to that, that whichever side you're on, you should not attack civilians. Simple as that. If the other side does, then they're murderers. But if you retaliate by murdering other civilians, you're no better than they are.

Red Tulips said...

Um, no, Sphinx.

I am only responding to your ludicrous argument about 'proportionality.'

You claim somehow that the US should be 'proportional' in its responses. That means purposely mass murdering civilians in response to the purposeful mass murder of civilians. Thus, that is essentially what you are arguing.

Or, alternatively, you now are arguing that somehow the US/Israel should be pacifists and just sit back and be annhilated, because it is "no better" than the other side to respond.

Your ideology is 'humane' why, exactly?

X said...

RT,

Has it occured to you that your version of 'proportionality' is exactly what the US pursues? In fact the US goes beyond the call of duty and kills 10 civilians for every one of its own civilian killed. As with so many things, US portions are simply bigger than everywhere else...

Red Tulips said...

X,

The US does not aim for civilians purposely. At least not since WWII. So your point has no relevance whatsoever.

I would say that I agree that the US is not 'proportional' when it attacks others. I also say I would not want to live in a country that was.

X said...

RT: The US government launched a war in full knowledge that not only would *some* Iraqi civilians get killed, but that quite a lot would likely die as a result of the aftermath. How do you think tens of thousands died in Iraq and Afghanistan, mowed down by cruise missiles, aerial bombardment and US automatic weapons? Did they throw themselves into the line of fire? Or was a US thumb on the trigger, and behind that thumb a commander, and behind that commander a commander in chief, and behind that commander in chief...the people?

Red Tulips said...

X,

RT: The US government launched a war in full knowledge that not only would *some* Iraqi civilians get killed

Killing a civilian accidentally and in the heat of battle is completely different than AIMING for civilians. Or are you saying the US = Al Queda?

, but that quite a lot would likely die as a result of the aftermath.

Nope.

The US, sadly, did not adequately prepare for the aftermath of the battle against the Ba'ath party in Iraq. You decry thsi regularly. Yet not when it is convenient not to.

How do you think tens of thousands died in Iraq and Afghanistan, mowed down by cruise missiles, aerial bombardment and US automatic weapons?

More died as a result of Al Queda and suicide bombing. The US tries to bomb Al Queda in Iraq to PREVENT civilian death. Yet somehow you equate that with purposely killing civilians.

Skewed moral compass you have there.

Anonymous said...

I am only responding to your ludicrous argument about 'proportionality.'

You claim somehow that the US should be 'proportional' in its responses.


Proportional or not, the response to 9/11 should be targetted at the people responsible. Iraq wasn't.

The Sphinx said...

RT, if you claim that the US troops are going out of their way to prevent civilian deaths, then there is exactly one of two explanations why so many Iraqi civilians died:

Either they don't care about civilian deaths and damage to their property (Evident by the carpet bombing of entire cities, and random ransacking of Iraqi houses and apartments), OR they are too stupid to prevent these deaths and go after the right people.

Either way, they are causing much, much more unnecessary damage than the terrorists ever can, and have absolutely no business trying to "liberate" and "build up" another sovereign country.

Red Tulips said...

Sphinx,

It is clear why civilians died.

Terrorists routinely fire from civilian locations.

This is why you are a rampant Islamophobe when you claim how evil the US is, compared to, for instance, Al Queda. You refuse to denounce the very nation that is acting, however perhaps often ineptly, to protect Muslim life.

I really do hate Islamophobia, I have to tell you!

Sura 109 said...

When you are attacked, you fight back.

Yes. You fight back. Against the people who actually attacked you. Or would you have responded to Pearl Harbor by bombing Thailand?

The US does not aim for civilians purposely.

Which is very comforting to the dead.

Killing a civilian accidentally and in the heat of battle is completely different than AIMING for civilians.

Not to the civilian in question, it isn't.

Or are you saying the US = Al Queda?

Osama bin Laughin' has killed his thousands, and george w. bush his hundreds of thousands.

The US tries to bomb Al Queda in Iraq to PREVENT civilian death.

There was no "Al Qaeda in Iraq" before george w. bush started dropping bombs.

The Anti-Wahhabi said...

I never thought the LGF crowd could be even more fucktarded than trying to connect Iran to 9/11, as the red tulips jackass has been insinuating.

And people wonder why the rest of the world hates us.

The Sphinx said...

Your excuse is more fragile than a house of cards, that it's the "terrorists' fault that civilians are dying, because they put them to risk". Why not put the blame where it belongs, right in the hands of troops that have killed civilians and acted as if it wasn't their fault, regardless whether there were any militants in the area or not?

When Al Qaeda kills civilians, it's despicable, and when the US forces kill civilians, it's equally despicable. Just how brick-headed do you have to be not to understand this extremely simple concept? Oh but no, the troops who every now and then 'accidentally' kill some civilians by bombing out entire residential areas just LOVE the people they're murdering. That makes it just fine doesn't it?

Once you accuse me of being antisemitic (Even though I'm ethnically Semitic), then you call me an Islamophobe (Even though I'm a Muslim), and then you accuse me of being a "Typical Islamic Supremacist", even though just a moment before I passionately hated Muslims with all my heart (as you were trying to convince me).

With all the honesty in the world: You are just ridiculous.

Lex said...

I am sitting right now in a house formerly owned by one of the men who planned the Iraq war. Any search even just on Google will show every last company he has worked with and how they all end up with contracts in Iraq. Do not tell me that this has not been war for profit nor that it has done a single thing to "fight back" against al Qaeda.

I named my main blog "What Would Charles Martel Do?" for a reason. I DO believe in fighting back when invaded and attacked, as the al Qaeda terrorists DID DO on 9/11/01. What that has to do with our troops in Iraq in March of 2008 I don't know other than a hell of a lot of people down here high enough up at CENTCOM/MacDill AFB, Tampa, Florida are sitting very pretty as a result.

General "Rifle" Mike DeLong. Google him.

Red Tulips said...

Sura 109,

You fail to realize that while Iraq might have been a bad idea to begin with, but Saddam was a fundamentally evil man who tortured/raped/maimed/massacred Iraqis regularly. The Ba'ath party was also Nazi-linked. You imply somehow it is itself tragic that Saddam was gone, and/or he was a good man.

HUH?

And moreover, at present there is Al Queda in Iraq, and the US army is fighting them. This is saving Iraqi lives. Are you saying the US should let Iraqis die? Are you really so cold hearted? Do you really hate Iraqis that much?

Sphinx,

When Al Qaeda kills civilians, it's despicable, and when the US forces kill civilians, it's equally despicable. Just how brick-headed do you have to be not to understand this extremely simple concept?

Thank you for your delightful moral equivalence. You keep digging your Islamophobic hole deeper and deeper. (it is assumed you hate America, Israel, and tacitly Jews, so I need not go on about things like that)

You just stated that the US, which is actively out there trying to SAVE THE LIVES of Iraqis in Iraq, is somehow 'equal' to human butchers who mass murder civilians on purpose. This shows how much you actually, more than hating America, hate the Iraqis who are dying at the hands of Al Queda. Rampant Islamophobia.

To you, the savior = the torturer. You show complete and total disrespect for Iraqis, complete and total disrespect for Muslims who are daily being victimized by Islamists. That is why you are more than merely antisemitic. I should not even have mentioned that statement, because it's basically a given that you hate America and the Jews. No, you are a rampant, rabid Islamophobe. You hate your fellow countrymen when somehow you excuse jihadist violence.

Why not put the blame where it belongs, right in the hands of troops that have killed civilians and acted as if it wasn't their fault, regardless whether there were any militants in the area or not?

The US army does not hope to kill civilians. It has done so accidentally when it chose the wrong targets to go after, and it has done so when jihadists camp out in the middle of civilian areas on purpose. But to you, somehow, none of this matters. The US = Al Queda, or actually, they're worse!

Yet you claim to be pro-American.

Not only are you NOT pro-American, given how you cavalierly believe in throwing Iraqis and other Muslims to the Islamofascist wolves who are killing them, you are a total Islamophobe. You think that you are acting in defense of Muslims, but you are doing the opposite.

So sad.

Tex Taylor said...

Sphinxter,

RT, if you claim that the US troops are going out of their way to prevent civilian deaths, then there is exactly one of two explanations why so many Iraqi civilians died:

There is only one explanation. Your brothers-in-arms are killing their own, including now your loving Muslim mothers turning their trick. Funny how the civilian deaths dramatically dropped when your cousin Al-Qaida started getting their asses kicked from Iraq straight to hell. I doubt you noticed.

The Sphinx said...

"You fail to realize that while Iraq might have been a bad idea to begin with, but Saddam was a fundamentally evil man who tortured/raped/maimed/massacred Iraqis regularly. The Ba'ath party was also Nazi-linked. You imply somehow it is itself tragic that Saddam was gone, and/or he was a good man."

This is how you lot always behave when you're cornered about a point, and keep hopping from one lame apologetic excuse to the other to justify a war.

"We're attacking Iraq because of 9/11" - Well, neither Iraq nor Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11
"Then we're attacking Iraq because of Al Qaeda" - It's the other way round, Al Qaeda is NOW there because you attacked
"Umm.. We're 'liberating' Iraq in order to promote democracy" - Well you had no business imposing whatever form of government you want on another country that didn't ask for it
"Well then Saddam was BAD, we HAD to remove him" - First off, Saddam was no threat to world security as first portrayed, and whereas it's good that he was toppled, that happened 5 years ago. You should've left as soon as Chimpy proclaimed "Mission accomplished".


And Lex is right, there is a whole load of filthy business that was made for this war. People becoming rich at the cost of an entire nations stability and welfare, and its populations lives. This is something the American people are not responsible for, but those who exploit and/or cheer on this war despite everything it has caused should be ashamed for being such a role model of human stupidity. Yes, I mean you.

"You just stated that the US, which is actively out there trying to SAVE THE LIVES of Iraqis in Iraq, is somehow 'equal' to human butchers who mass murder civilians on purpose."

The civilians that die on the hands of coalition soldiers couldn't give a rat's behind whether they were killed out of evil intent (something that has occurred in the case of a couple of American soldiers), or whether they were killed out of love and care, as you are laughably trying to convince me.


"This shows how much you actually, more than hating America, hate the Iraqis who are dying at the hands of Al Queda. Rampant Islamophobia."

Wow, Tex Taylor has had a large impact on your thinking. If you think that condemning morally bankrupt politicians for pushing through a war based on lies, destroying two countries and leading to the death of over a million people, while their business allies are rolling in money in the aftermath, is even halfway equal to hating the entire country and its population, most of which were vehemently against this dirty war, then you have no grasp of reality anymore.

In fact, by your retarded standard, you passionately hate Americans for claiming that they all belong to your war-hungry cult, and throwing them into the same pot that rightfully appears in a negative light for the rest of the world. (Your logic, not mine)


"I should not even have mentioned that statement, because it's basically a given that you hate America and the Jews. No, you are a rampant, rabid Islamophobe."

If I hate America and the Jews, then you're a blithering idiot. In fact no, I don't hate America or Americans (ask Lex). I was also saying, and still say that Judaism is God's religion even long before YOU even acknowledged that God does exist, and don't bear any ill feelings towards any Jewish people. And it was YOU who considered Islam rotten to the core at a point, and happily read the center for Islam-hatred, LGF, every day.

You're claims are libelous, defamatory, and show what kind of blithering idiot you are.

"You hate your fellow countrymen when somehow you excuse jihadist violence."

I don't know where you pulled that out of. In fact, if you scroll back to my last comment, you'll probably notice that I said: "When Al Qaeda kills civilians, it's despicable"
So either you don't know how to read, or you have severe problems putting the meaning of words together.

"The US army does not hope to kill civilians. It has done so accidentally when it chose the wrong targets to go after, and it has done so when jihadists camp out in the middle of civilian areas on purpose."

When these soldiers who "accidentally" *wink wink* rape Iraqi women and massacre their entire families (It happened a few times) get off with relatively light sentences - if they are unlucky - then there's a lot more behind this than poor loving troops that somehow couldn't distinguish between armed militias and young children when opening fire. Apparently there are ardent efforts to cover up for such scandals.

"But to you, somehow, none of this matters. The US = Al Queda, or actually, they're worse!"

I don't know really, if you look at the numbers, then the US Government has a lot more blood on its hands than all the Al Qaedas of the world put together. That you fail to see this is remarkable, and it's all because you just can't live with this fact.

As for Tex:

"There is only one explanation. Your brothers-in-arms are killing their own, including now your loving Muslim mothers turning their trick. Funny how the civilian deaths dramatically dropped when your cousin Al-Qaida started getting their asses kicked from Iraq straight to hell. I doubt you noticed."

You should be old enough to remember that Al Qaeda is practically a US-made product. A few decades ago these were the same people your Government back then was heavily financing and arming, to use as a proxy force against the Soviets.
Even Saddam himself was aided with weapons and money from the Reagen administration.

But the key point - and I'm repeating it again - is that the invasion wasn't to root out al Qaeda, but Al Qaeda is in Iraq because of the invasion. Maybe if you'd reflect on that for a while, you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself in front of everybody.

Tex Taylor said...

Sphinxter,

That's it. Lay the blame on your faith's major league failings on somebody else. Always looking for the excuse and playing victim trying to excuse the cesspool your ilk has created.

But the key point - and I'm repeating it again - is that the invasion wasn't to root out al Qaeda, but Al Qaeda is in Iraq because of the invasion. Maybe if you'd reflect on that for a while, you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself in front of everybody.

And once again I say it is brilliant policy implemented if that is exactly what we have done. Al Qaeda flocks to Iraq and we kill them. Absolutely brilliant in saving America lives. And yes, I consider your worth far less than I do any American.

You may be a legend in your own mind Sphinxter but I don't see many flocking to your cause...

Red Tulips said...

Thanks, Tex, so true!

I was thinking actually of starting "Muslimophobia Awareness Week" around the world. I would like to expose the rampant Muslimophobia of people like Sphinx and LGF Watch.

Sphinx openly said that the USA is worse than Al Queda.

I don't know really, if you look at the numbers, then the US Government has a lot more blood on its hands than all the Al Qaedas of the world put together.

What vile Muslimophobia. Jihadists have killed more Muslims than Americans have. But somehow that is totally irrelevant to the Muslimophobic Sphinx, who somehow thinks the lives of those Muslims killed by Al Queda, Hizballah, Mahdi Army, Revolutionary Guard, Jemaat Islamiyah, Hamas, Fatah, FIS, etc etc, are all irrelevant. I guess those lives don't matter, as it was not Jew-on-Muslim violence, or America-on-Muslim violence. Who cares about these people, right? To you, America is worse than Al Queda!

What rampant Muslimophobia!

When American soldiers torture or rape, there are investigations and hearings. When Al Queda/Hizballah/Hamas/etc do so, this is celebrated! These monsters literally - no exaggeration - bathe in blood. But to you, America is worse than Al Queda! (but you don't hate America, oh no, how dare I even SUGGEST such a thing?)

Fighting terror in your eyes is actually WORSE than committing the acts of terror themselves, "because the people on the ground don't know the difference."

Do you think Iraqis have the sort of child-like mentality that you do? Do you think they really cannot tell the difference when someone is fighting to free them of the jihadist death grip trying to engulf them, and the jihadists themselves?

According to your non-logic, somehow the liberators of concentration camps during the Holocaust were "as bad" as the Nazis themselves, because some Jews accidentally died when the Allies were freeing them from the camps. This is the ludicrous non-logic you employ. It is so ludicrous, it is outright offensive.

You believe Iraqis must clearly be retarded, AND, you do not care about Iraqi lives (or any Muslim lives) when jihadists kill them.

What rampant, over the top, Muslimophobia!

Shocking, really, the extent of your hatred for your co-religionists.

The Sphinx said...

This one's rich: "And yes, I consider your worth far less than I do any American."

Isn't this mentality exactly what allowed the Holocaust to happen? I thought this is exactly the way that zealots view different human beings. Didn't you believe in God a while ago? I thought belief in God came hand-in-hand with the belief that all humans are created equal.

But doesn't really surprise me that you think in this fashion. You were always "that guy", you know..

And for the third time already in this comment section: "When Al Qaeda kills civilians, it's despicable"

This is already the THIRD time I write this, and you act as if I've never said it.

You're either illiterate, blind, or insanely stupid. Sometimes I wonder if you're acting stupid on purpose just to confuse me and make me think that I must be the crazy one. Great job, it's not working one bit.

Me an Islamophobe. Some great logic, Miss Red "Islam-is-rotten-to-the-core and Gaza-deserves-war-crimes-against-it" Tulips.

This is ridiculous enough. I'm out of this discussion.

Red Tulips said...

Sphinx,

And for the third time already in this comment section: "When Al Qaeda kills civilians, it's despicable"

This is already the THIRD time I write this, and you act as if I've never said it.


That is because you say that the US is worse than Al Queda. So actually, you minimize Al Queda's murders and maximize the US's response in defending *mostly Muslims* against these murders. You have said that the US is worse than Al Queda again and again and again.

What part of "Muslimophobe" do you not understand?

Anyway, I want to thank you, Sphinx, as you have inspired me. I plan on taking this nationwide, "Muslimophobia Awareness Week." I am going to expose the shocking hate and disregard you (and millions and millions like you) have for your co-religionists.

Thank you for this productive exchange.

I also would like to thank you for libelling me. You stated I am Miss Red "Islam-is-rotten-to-the-core and Gaza-deserves-war-crimes-against-it" Tulips. Given I never said such things, it only shows you what steps you have to resort to after you haev been proven to be the Muslimophobe you are.

What I find amazing is that I, a Jewish American Zionist, care more about the rights of Muslims than you, an Egyptian Muslim. Says everything, doesn't it?

Tex Taylor said...

Sphinxter,

Talk about rich...

Isn't this mentality exactly what allowed the Holocaust to happen? I thought this is exactly the way that zealots view different human beings. Didn't you believe in God a while ago? I thought belief in God came hand-in-hand with the belief that all humans are created equal.

Is that what they are teaching you over in Egypt? Rabid Jews butchering innocent Nazis. You a student of the Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini's teachings? Superior analogy and one I would expect with your superior intellect.

You like to note and emphasize words. Well, quid pro quo...note the word "created." However, folks don't end up that way. Decisions have consequences and you continue to choose poorly.

Queen O'Danile said...

Hey folks, the Iraq war is all about liberation. The US is liberating them from life. And should't the dead be grateful??? (No pun intended abt the rock group.)