0
   

Ding Dong Imad Mughniyeh is Dead --- Your Reaction?

 
 
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 12:34 am
Imad Mughniyeh died in an explosion in a residential section of the Syrian capital, Damascus today.

Mughniyeh was responsible for

1983 bombings if the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon - 63 killed
1983 bombing of Marine barracks in Beirut - 482 killed
1985 hijacking of a TWA airliner 1 killed
1985 CIA station chief William Buckley, tortured and killed
1985 kidnappings of Western journalist journalist Terry Anderson
1992 bombing of Israel's embassy in Argentina 29 killed
1994 bombing a Buenos Aires Jewish center - 95 killed
1996 attack on the Khobar Towers complex, in Saudi Arabia - 19 killed

"The world is a better place without this man in it," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack. "One way or the other he was brought to justice."

"I can't say I'm either surprised or sad (by his death). He was not a good man. Certainly, the primary actor in my kidnapping and many others," Anderson told AP on Wednesday. "To hear that his career has finally ended is a good thing and it's appropriate that he goes up in a car bomb."

CNN
Herald Tribune
FBI Most Wanted Terrorist List
FOX
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,002 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 12:57 am
I'm absolutely not a supporter of Imad Mughniyeh & his ilk .... but what do you have to say about the ethics & the culpability of the president of the most powerful nation on the planet in instigating the "shocking & awing" of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens for no clear reason?

Perhaps the world will be a better place when he's gone, too?

And will he ever be brought to justice?

There are monsters & monsters ....
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 02:49 am
live by the sword die by the sword...
0 Replies
 
nappyheadedhohoho
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 03:02 pm
Re: Ding Dong Imad Mughniyeh is Dead --- Your Reaction?
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Imad Mughniyeh died


Great news. One less inbred troglodyte murderer on the planet.



Berkeley flying its flags at half staff....
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 03:26 pm
msolga wrote:
I'm absolutely not a supporter of Imad Mughniyeh & his ilk .... but what do you have to say about the ethics & the culpability of the president of the most powerful nation on the planet in instigating the "shocking & awing" of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens for no clear reason?

Perhaps the world will be a better place when he's gone, too?

And will he ever be brought to justice?

There are monsters & monsters ....


I think Mughniyeh and this president will be rooming in the same realm in the afterlife (assuming there is such a place).
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 10:44 pm
msolga wrote:
I'm absolutely not a supporter of Imad Mughniyeh & his ilk .... but what do you have to say about the ethics & the culpability of the president of the most powerful nation on the planet in instigating the "shocking & awing" of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens for no clear reason?

Perhaps the world will be a better place when he's gone, too?

And will he ever be brought to justice?

There are monsters & monsters ....


You are free to draw moral equivalence between Mughniyeh and Bush. You would not be able to do so in a world governed by Mughniyeh and his pals, but who really cares about such trivial distinctions?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 10:51 pm
Green Witch wrote:
msolga wrote:
I'm absolutely not a supporter of Imad Mughniyeh & his ilk .... but what do you have to say about the ethics & the culpability of the president of the most powerful nation on the planet in instigating the "shocking & awing" of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens for no clear reason?

Perhaps the world will be a better place when he's gone, too?

And will he ever be brought to justice?

There are monsters & monsters ....


I think Mughniyeh and this president will be rooming in the same realm in the afterlife (assuming there is such a place).


And this is a perfect example of why, literally, millions of people think persons such as you are entirely effed up.

I assume you feel there is a reservation in the same hellish room for Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy, Harry Truman, Franklin D Roosevelt, and Woodrwo Wilson.

If not, why not?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2008 10:56 pm
All responses to the poll are anonymous, but I would very much appreciate the person who responded with "Sadness" to explain why?

I promise will not pass judgment on your reasoning.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Feb, 2008 08:31 am
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I assume you feel there is a reservation in the same hellish room for Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy, Harry Truman, Franklin D Roosevelt, and Woodrwo Wilson.
If not, why not?


I'm wasn't alive when many of these presidents made their decisions, nor do I know enough of their histories to pass judgement., I can say that I don't believe Clinton, Carter, Nixon or Reagan (although not on your list) committed anything close to the evil the Bush administration has wrought. I think every life and limb lost in Iraq is a crime against humanity, and Bush & Co. did it all for greed and what they believed would be personal glory. It was pure hubris. It didn't have anything to do with getting Bin Laden or controlling terrorism. It had to do with a bunch of Big Shots salivating over power and being handed the greatest military force on earth to do their bidding. Trillions of our tax dollars spent on destruction and fueling hatred, I can think of no greater waste. This country and the world are going to pay for Bush's "sins" for generations to come.

Every American president has the opportunity to be great because of our resources and strengths. This president has chosen to bankrupt us of our morality, our finances, our dignity and our greatness. He is a disgrace to the office he holds. I hope there is justice somewhere in the universe, and I hope some day he will be held accountable.

The old time Republicans in my family have changed their party loyalty because of this smarmy administration.

And that's all I'm gonna say, because we can't change each other's mind.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 02:37 am
msolga wrote:
I'm absolutely not a supporter of Imad Mughniyeh & his ilk .... but what do you have to say about the ethics & the culpability of the president of the most powerful nation on the planet in instigating the "shocking & awing" of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens for no clear reason?


Shock and Awe was not instigated. It was just pre-war propaganda to throw Saddam off from our real plan of attack.

Had Shock and Awe been instigated, it would not have been inflicted on innocents, except in cases of collateral damage.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 05:50 pm
What's interesting is that a thread about the person that planned the killing of Americans has been diverted, by some, to a thread about the United States. Can't people stay on topic?

Also, Israel denies responsibility. So, who else effected this? Is James Bond back?

I personally think it is Israel, since they didn't give up getting Eichmann. Notice there are no "thank-you's" directed towards Israel or whoever effected this. Does this mean western democracies are now scared to applaud the elimination of someone that killed Americans? I think President Reagan might be ashamed of us Americans for our reluctance to applaud whoever did this.
0 Replies
 
nappyheadedhohoho
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 07:50 pm
Foofie wrote:
What's interesting is that a thread about the person that planned the killing of Americans has been diverted, by some, to a thread about the United States. Can't people stay on topic?


BDS = Bush Derangement Syndrome. It's old, it's boring, I generally tend to ignore them.

Foofie wrote:
Also, Israel denies responsibility. So, who else effected this? Is James Bond back?


Whether it was Israel, the CIA or Spongebob, I don't care. I'm just happy Imad is rotting in hell with his buddies.

Foofie wrote:
I personally think it is Israel, since they didn't give up getting Eichmann. Notice there are no "thank-you's" directed towards Israel or whoever effected this. Does this mean western democracies are now scared to applaud the elimination of someone that killed Americans? I think President Reagan might be ashamed of us Americans for our reluctance to applaud whoever did this.


I am speechless with admiration for whoever pulled this off. It's very, very good news and given the chance I would offer up a toast to the guys that managed to pull this off. I hope they got away safely.
0 Replies
 
stevewonder
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 06:51 am
It shouldnt surprise me that some people find personal entertainment from the killing of people, there is inactual fact no moral difference between group terrorism and state terrorism, aswell as those who follow either and gain staisfaction and pleasure out of death and mindless violence.

Here is an Israeli, yes an Israelis talking sense, (brace yourself if you are a neo-con lunatic) its an old article but very relevant.

We are either going to define ourselves in word and deed as civilized which means
guantanamo is out!
water boarding is out!
occupation is out!

and

Geeneva convention is in!
Human rights are in!
Ethicsl foreign policy is in!

or we can just say we are morally no different from crazed terrorists and stop pussy footing around.

personally I adhere to the first option.



Israel: Political Assassination and International Law
by Tanya Reinhart

Yediot Aharonot, 30 March 2004.
www.globalresearch.ca 31 March 2004
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/REI403B.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An extensive discussion has already taken place in Israel regarding the cost-benefit ratio of Yassin's assassination. But the question of justice has hardly been raised.

According to international law, the execution of any person in an occupied territory is not allowed. The Geneva convention, born out of the horrifying experience of the second World War, sets limitations on the use of force even in times of war. The convention distinguishes between war and a state of occupation. Its fundamentals are, first, that occupied people are "protected", and that the occupier is responsible for their safety. Second, it determines that the occupied people have the right to fight for their liberation. International conventions are one of the means people have developed for self-preservation. Without them, there is a danger that the human race would annihilate itself - first the strong would wipe out the weak, and then each other.

During its 37 years of occupation, Israel has already violated every article of the Geneva convention. But what it did now is unprecedented. As Robert Fisk stated it in the British Independent, "for years, there has been an unwritten rule in the cruel war of government-versus-guerrilla. You can kill the men on the street, the bomb makers and gunmen. But the leadership on both sides - government ministers, spiritual leaders were allowed to survive." Even when the leader advocates violence and terror, the norm has been that he may be imprisoned, but not killed.

Ahmed Yassin viewed himself as struggling against the occupation. As reported in Yediot Aharonot, his demand was a full withdrawal of the Israeli army from the occupied territories, back to the borders of 1967. In 1993, Hamas agreed to the principles of the Oslo accords, but did not believe that Rabin would translate these principles into action, and urged the Palestinian people to remember that the occupation was not yet over. During the iron-fist period of Barak and Sharon, Yassin proposed a long term 'hudna' (cease fire), but he also believed that Israel would never end the occupation of its own will. "The enemy understands only the language of war, bombs and explosives" - he preached to his followers, and declared that "every Israeli is a target for us".

The Geneva convention recognizes the right of the occupied people to carry out armed struggle against the occupying army, but not to use terror against civilians. Terror has no moral justification, and is not defended by international law. But it is necessary that we Israelis examine ourselves in this regard as well. What other way do we leave open for the Palestinian people to struggle for their liberation? Along the route of the wall in the West Bank, a new form of popular resistance has been formed in the last few months. Palestinian farmers whose land is being robbed sit on the ground in front of the bulldozers, accompanied by the Israeli opponents of the wall - the veterans of the Mas'ha camp. What could be more non-violent than this? But the Israeli army shoots at sitting demonstrators, like in Tiennamen square.
The Israeli army blocks all options of non-violent resistance from the Palestinians. With the arrogant elimination of a leader and a symbol, as he was leaving a mosque, the army knowingly created a new wave of violence and terror. It is hard not to get the impression that terror is convenient for Sharon and the army. It enables them to convince the world that the Geneva protections do not apply to the Palestiians, because they have terrorists in their midst, and that, therefore, it is permitted to do anything to them.

Since September 11th, as part of its "war against terror," the U.S. has been pushing to destroy all defences provided by International law. But even the U.S. has not yet dared to publicly execute a spiritual-religious leader (of, for example, the Taliban in Afghanistan). Now Israel has determined, with U.S. blessing, that even this is permitted. Under military rule, Israel has become a leading force in the destruction of the very protections that humankind has established, out of World War Two, for its own preservation, protections that we too may need one day, as history has already shown us.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 11:04 am
fini wrote:
I promise will not pass judgment on your reasoning.

lol
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 11:56 pm
dyslexia wrote:
fini wrote:
I promise will not pass judgment on your reasoning.

lol


Wow that's damned clever to morph my moniker to "fini."

But what does it mean? Are you Good Ole Dys cum Cicero or just a a-hole truncating my screen name?

(I bet you can guess which choice I favor.)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Ding Dong Imad Mughniyeh is Dead --- Your Reaction?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 06/22/2021 at 01:34:53