Tsk, tsk. Discussing mod actions.

Now, I know you like to keep asking questions that have been answered ad nauseum, but I'll repeat my question which you haven't answered in lieu of discussing a poster: How do you know the DoD numbers are "completely off"?

You can twist my position as much as you want. I already covered all the points you raised in that thread, including the point you just raised.

Why dont you link the thread for people to see what I said there. You are trying to take everyone off topic here... I ask you again to stick to the topic, stop breaking rules or else you will get a warning and a couple of points on your license.

I have talked about how the UN security council did not agree that its a "terrorism" attack. I also talked about how the seminary was full of IDF students, fully armed. Also, the school conducts research for building and expanding settlements.

Now link the thread and let people read my comments in details there, instead of quoting me out of context. Something you are good at.

WS.

__________________
"You can't separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom"- Malcom X

Is it so much easier to discuss other posters than answer a simple question?

Wait a sec Si Modo. You seem to have the idea that I care about having discussions with you You have offended me in the past. You dont deserve my answers.

Your position on the death of 90 afghani women and children is clear, thank you. Its just a "tragedy". No shit!...Got ya!... thanks for stating the friggin obvious.

WS.

__________________
"You can't separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom"- Malcom X

No twisting required - you said the killing of that unarmed 15 year old boy was "VERY HEROIC". Clearly and plainly.

I understand why you want to backpedal from that hateful, nauseating comment.

Um, anyone who reads the quote of you there can click the little blue triangle and be taken to the thread.

I'm completely on topic, refuting your claim you didn't say the hateful things in your post.

Yes, yes, yes, you've done a lot of mental gymnastics to try and justify the killing of an unarmed 15 year old boy. Each and every twist hateful to God and man, and nauseating to anyone with a conscience.

Tell me, have you any sympathy for that dead child or his parents?

As explained above, it's linked. As for your orders, maybe someone else is interested in following your pious commands. Myself, I don't answer to you.


Matt
WS.[/QUOTE]

Yet, here you are in a one-sided exchange with me. How very convenient and very lazy.

And you called me an Islamophobe. Do you have a point?

How very rich. You demand an answer to a question you ask ad nauseum, then say, "No shit" when you get another answer. Rich.

Now, how do you know the DoD numbers are "completely off"?

Not that you've ever exhibited any. Allah must be so disappointed.

Better she calls it a tragedy than someone call it "VERY HEROIC".

Yummm..just got back from breakfast..so whats been going on?

Oh I see, so chocobot has consigned my post to the underhanded dust bin absent not only awareness of past topics discussed let alone reading them…I see…anything else?

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

Ah come on.

You make your attack based upon comments made on another thread, leaving out any detail, and now you contend that its NOT underhand?

Are you baiting WS now? Why the reference to Allah? Do you think you think you are being respectful to WS's religion here ?



It seems WS contests the innocence of these students,in this example. Much like few would complain if an armed Palestinian 15 year old were to be killed.


Re: the numbers on this thread. I think that WS would contend the number are likely way off given the vested interest of the DoD in reducing the numbers and the impartiality of the UN. Is this correct WS?

The worst thing about this is how avoidable and unnecessary it is. There is no way to justify it without sacrificing ones integrity, and even those who do cannot deny that the only way this event or the dozens more like it could possibly be more counterproductive to the interests of the United States is if it was deliberate. It may eventually dawn on us that antagonizing people who can neither defend themselves nor retaliate directly--even if by accident--is not only wrong but has consequences; the only question is whether or not this realization will occur before, during, or after we suffer those consequences.

Because I felt like it. Allah means nothing to me, nor do the rules of his religion.

If people can appeal to Allah to justify killing and mahyem, I can appeal to Allah to seek truthfulness.

Don't like that? Too damn bad.

The 15 year old was not armed, and his murder was an act of cowardice and depravity. But wrap it in the mantle of Islam (as the murder's cohorts have done), and it magically becomes acceptable to some.

Matt

But you didnt appeal to Allah. You instead mentioned Allah's supposed disappointment even though you have no care for nor any understanding of that religion, as you just said.

Thus you are baiting.

I dont mind it myself, I just wonder if youll allow others the same priviledge.


I think WS contests the notion of these students innocence. Given the doctrine of the school. Further I think its been wrapped instead in the mantle of Palestinians self defence rather than Islam given that this is a settler school.

Sure, you can say whatever you want about Allah, Buddah, Jesus, Mohammed, Vishnu or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Right, because an arbitrary declaration that a 15 year old boy is not innocent makes it acceptable to call his cowardly murder "VERY HEROIC".

If WS didn't arbitrarily decide that the 15 year old child wasn't innocent, then he'd have to face up to the fact that he actively supports killing children.

Matt

Of course one can mention anything at any time. For example;
ihvhivkiviug8ob8g8

However, the question remains over your motive for mentioning Allah. You could have said God, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Buddha, Vishnu, Jehovah or anything. But you said Allah.

Despite the fact that the discussion is not even about religion!

I contend you said Allah because of WS. You wouldnt have said Allah if you were talking to anyone else. You in fact sought to hold up Allah to WS's face in the hope of pointing out a contrast between Allah's message and WS evil words (in your view). You also thereby implied that WS would be keen to adhere to Allah's message and thus he would be guilty of hypocrisy. All this done in ignorance of Allah, or WSs thoughts on Islam.

Whats then curious of course. Is that given that you think all this is ok, would you then disagree with others doing the same thing?

For example, in an argument with a Jew - "Oooo your Jehovah will be so disappointed" or a christian "your God would be so disappointed" to a Christian in a discussion about the economy is a reprehensible act. But surely you would then thus agree that its ok??


No more arbitrary than other comment though is it? Isnt your assertion that the murderer is a coward also arbitrary? After all, this murderer put his own life down also, and knowingly.

The 'arbitrary' comment is baseless.

The only question remaining is the innocence of the 15 year old. Obviously he (WS) does support the killing of guilty children engaged in the act of land theft. But then dont you to support the killing of guilty chidren? Wouldnt you defend yourself with lethal force against an armed child?