0
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ VI

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 02:30 pm
ican711nm wrote:


Murderers ought to lose their land to those they attempt to murder and to those whose family members they murdered.


This was abolished partly by the Codex Euricianus (about 450 AD) and completely by Charlemagne here in Germany (and Europe) - I wonder, if it could be re-established.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 02:35 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Shocking and Awful

May 6, 2004
By MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

... were swanning around ... mingling with le hack Washington and a speckling of shiny imports ... The Pentagon potentates ... the torture pictures ... the latest example of a dysfunctional and twisted occupation
warped by arrogance over experience, ideology over common
sense. ... Myopia from Utopia!" ... these woolly
headed warriors ... Can't the hawks who dragged us into this hideous unholy war ... a huge worldwide, American-reputation-shattering military scandal ... so he doesn't keep nattering ... about how we had to go to war to close Iraq's torture chambers, when they are "really not
shut down so much as under new management ... a "party on, Garth" mood, less concerned with Humpty Dumpty Iraq or Unjolly Green Giant ... Rush Limbaugh compared the prison torture to "a college fraternity
prank," like a Skull and Bones initiation. ...

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:01 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
ican711nm wrote:


Murderers ought to lose their land to those they attempt to murder and to those whose family members they murdered.


This was abolished partly by the Codex Euricianus (about 450 AD) and completely by Charlemagne here in Germany (and Europe) - I wonder, if it could be re-established.


It was a mistake to abolish it.

Here's a mistake of yours that you can and ought to rectify: You declare to be victims those who murder innocents; you declare to be thieves those who attempt to defend themselves against murderers by occuping the land the murderers use to attempt murder.

"Mein Kampf" said as much in 1925-1926. You're in like company.

www.m-w.com
Quote:
Main Entry: vic·tim
Pronunciation: 'vik-t&m
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English vyctym, from Latin victima; perhaps akin to Old High German wIh holy
1 : a living being sacrificed to a deity or in the performance of a religious rite
2 : one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent <the schools are victims of the social system>: as a (1) : one that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed under any of various conditions <a victim of cancer> <a victim of the auto crash> <a murder victim> (2) : one that is subjected to oppression, hardship, or mistreatment <a frequent victim of political attacks> b : one that is tricked or duped <a con man's victim>
- vic·tim·hood /-"hud/ noun


www.m-w.com
Quote:
Main Entry: thief
Pronunciation: 'thEf
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural thieves /'thEvz/
Etymology: Middle English theef, from Old English thEof; akin to Old High German diob thief
: one that steals especially stealthily or secretly; also : one who commits theft or larceny


www.m-w.com
Quote:
Main Entry: 1steal
Pronunciation: 'stE(&)l
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): stole /'stOl/; sto·len /'stO-l&n/; steal·ing
Etymology: Middle English stelen, from Old English stelan; akin to Old High German stelan to steal
intransitive senses
1 : to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as an habitual or regular practice
2 : to come or go secretly, unobtrusively, gradually, or unexpectedly
3 : to steal or attempt to steal a base
transitive senses
1 a : to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully <stole a car> b : to take away by force or unjust means <they've stolen our liberty> c : to take surreptitiously or without permission <steal a kiss> d : to appropriate to oneself or beyond one's proper share : make oneself the focus of <steal the show>
2 a : to move, convey, or introduce secretly : SMUGGLE b : to accomplish in a concealed or unobserved manner <steal a visit>
3 a : to seize, gain, or win by trickery, skill, or daring <a basketball player adept at stealing the ball> <stole the election> b of a base runner : to reach (a base) safely solely by running and usually catching the opposing team off guard
- steal·able /'stE-l&-b&l/ adjective
- steal·er noun
- steal a march on : to gain an advantage on unobserved
- steal one's thunder : to grab attention from another especially by anticipating an idea, plan, or presentation also : to claim credit for another's idea
synonyms STEAL, PILFER, FILCH, PURLOIN mean to take from another without right or without detection. STEAL may apply to any surreptitious taking of something and differs from the other terms by commonly applying to intangibles as well as material things <steal jewels> <stole a look at the gifts>. PILFER implies stealing repeatedly in small amounts <pilfered from his employer>. FILCH adds a suggestion of snatching quickly and surreptitiously <filched an apple from the tray>. PURLOIN stresses removing or carrying off for one's own use or purposes <printed a purloined document>.


Enjoy yourself! Smile
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:08 pm
Ican wrote

Quote:
Here's a mistake of yours that you can and ought to rectify: You declare to be victims those who murder innocents; you declare to be thieves those who attempt to defend themselves against murderers by occuping the land the murderers use to attempt murder.

"Mein Kampf" said as much in 1925-1926. You're in like company.


that is a disgraceful comment Ican and you should withdraw it.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:14 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Except that Saddam would have his hands on the tap! Again you dont understand. Its not just buying it that counts, its controlling supply. America was not going to sit back and be dependent on Iraqi oil with someone like Saddam in charge.


But America did sit back until March 2003. Then we finally acted in the sincere belief that our lives dependended on our acting; not our oil supply. Hell Saddam could have decided not to sell any oil to anyone who was or represented an American enduser. That would have meant that more of the Saudi or Quwaiti et al oil would have been available to us.

Do yourself a favour, steve, take and master a course in economics.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:21 pm
ican711nm wrote:
"Mein Kampf" said as much in 1925-1926. You're in like company.


I do sincerely hope, you apologize for that nonsense.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:25 pm
ican711nm wrote:

Quote:
Here's a mistake of yours that you can and ought to rectify: You declare to be victims those who murder innocents; you declare to be thieves those who attempt to defend themselves against murderers by occuping the land the murderers use to attempt murder.


I don't know where you studied law, and who taught you in law history, law theory and logics.

But you should ask them to return the fees.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:28 pm
Oh no, now he'll spam us with dictionary entries again. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:29 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Ican wrote

Quote:
Here's a mistake of yours that you can and ought to rectify: You declare to be victims those who murder innocents; you declare to be thieves those who attempt to defend themselves against murderers by occuping the land the murderers use to attempt murder.

"Mein Kampf" said as much in 1925-1926. You're in like company.


that is a disgraceful comment Ican and you should withdraw it.


Disgraceful? Is it disgraceful or merely a painful truth to you, which?

Reread "Mein Kampf" and you may perhaps see that it is loaded with exactly the same kind of discourse you have been perveying here.

The Israelies, while surely not saintly people any more or less than the rest of us, have the same right to defend themselves against their murderers and self-declared murderers as any one else. If you want the Israelies to stop defending themselves against their murderers and declared murderers any way they choose, then convince the murderers and self declared murderers of Israelies to stop murdering and declaring their intention to murder Israelies. Israelies do not want land for anything other than their own security from those who repeatedly threaten and do murder them.

Yes, by all means, as quickly as you can get to it, reread "Mein Kampf". Failure on your part to do so, would really be "disgraceful."
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:32 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Ican wrote

Quote:
Here's a mistake of yours that you can and ought to rectify: You declare to be victims those who murder innocents; you declare to be thieves those who attempt to defend themselves against murderers by occuping the land the murderers use to attempt murder.

"Mein Kampf" said as much in 1925-1926. You're in like company.


that is a disgraceful comment Ican and you should withdraw it.


Disgraceful? Is it disgraceful or merely a painful truth to you, which?

Reread "Mein Kampf" and you may perhaps see that it is loaded with exactly the same kind of discourse you have been perveying here.

The Israelies, while surely not saintly people any more or less than the rest of us, have the same right to defend themselves against their murderers and self-declared murderers as any one else. If you want the Israelies to stop defending themselves against their murderers and declared murderers any way they choose, then convince the murderers and self declared murderers of Israelies to stop murdering and declaring their intention to murder Israelies. Israelies do not want land for anything other than their own security from those who repeatedly threaten and do murder them.

Yes, by all means, as quickly as you can get to it, reread "Mein Kampf". Failure on your part to do so, would really be "disgraceful."


You answered that to me, not to Steve.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:37 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
I don't know where you studied law, and who taught you in law history, law theory and logics. But you should ask them to return the fees.


I'm self-taught and free of professorial propaganda. No fee, just hard study. To begin such a program yourself, I recommend The US Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Then move on to the Ten Commandments and see if you can discern the relationsip of the predecessor to the successor.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:40 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
I don't know where you studied law, and who taught you in law history, law theory and logics. But you should ask them to return the fees.


I'm self-taught and free of professorial propaganda.

Translation: I memorized things but I don't actually understand them.



Quote:
No fee, just hard study.

Translation: I find people more intelligent than me (which includes most of humanity) intimidating.


Quote:
To begin such a program yourself, I recommend The US Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Then move on to the Ten Commandments and see if you can discern the relationsip of the predecessor to the successor.

Translation: This way I don't have to find out if I've made any mistakes.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:43 pm
hobitbob wrote:

Translation: I memorized things but I don't actually understand them.

Translation: I find people more intelligent than me (which includes most of humanity) intimidating.

Translation: This way I don't have to find out if I've made any mistakes.


Laughing
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:46 pm
Thank's for confirming it.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 03:57 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
You answered that to me, not to Steve.


Sorry about that! Sometimes you two are difficult to tell apart! Smile

I shall now rectify that.

Disgraceful? Is it disgraceful or merely a painful truth to you too, which?

Reread "Mein Kampf" and you too may perhaps see that it is loaded with exactly the same kind of discourse steve has been perveying here.

The Israelies, while surely not saintly people any more or less than the rest of us, have the same right to defend themselves against their murderers and self-declared murderers as any one else. If you want the Israelies to stop defending themselves against their murderers and declared murderers any way they choose, then convince the murderers and self declared murderers of Israelies to stop murdering and declaring their intention to murder Israelies. Israelies do not want land for anything other than their own security from those who repeatedly threaten and do murder them.

Yes, by all means, as quickly as you too can get to it, reread "Mein Kampf". Failure on your part, too, to do so, would also really be "disgraceful."[/quote]
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 04:05 pm
Hey, dillwad..are you aware the Mein Kampf is prohibited in Germany? Are you also aware of just how offensive it was to suggest Walter read it? Despite the fact that you seem to agree with its premise (remember your comments about how destroying people's culture would be valuable?), civilised pople do not. Evil or Very Mad
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 04:06 pm
Since I own three university library ID-cards, I could do so. Otherwise it's impossible, since it's forbidden in Germany - btw, on intension of the USA, since 1945 - to buy or store 'Mein Kampf' outsite scientific purposes.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 04:31 pm
hobitbob wrote:
Hey, dillwad..are you aware the Mein Kampf is prohibited in Germany? Are you also aware of just how offensive it was to suggest Walter read it?


Yes, dingalingbrain, I'm aware that Mein Kampf is prohibited in Germany. Perhaps it's too shaming reminder of Germany's past when it should be seen as an extremely valuable text book on how to detect lying propaganda and lying propagandists.

Yes, I anticipated that it would initially appear offensive until Walter realized that I was sincerely attempting to alert him to what was evidence of his own inverted logic, and would then see it as an act of tough love on my part.

hobitbob wrote:
Despite the fact that you seem to agree with its premise (remember your comments about how destroying people's culture would be valuable?), civilised pople do not. Evil or Very Mad


Now there you go again slipping into the propaganda of hyperbole. Not cool!

I do in deed believe that the culture of a people (i.e., the practicianers of that culture) who repeatedly announce and repeatedly practice their belief that those people who disagree with that culture's belief ought to be "killed whereever you can find them," has earned its own extermination.

Further, I believe those who would defend themselves against such a culture and such a people are morally and ethically obligated for the sake of the survival of themselves, those they love, and the human race to exterminate that culture and exterminate or incarcerate its practitioners whereever they can find them.

Civilized people do too.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 04:46 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Since I own three university library ID-cards, I could do so. Otherwise it's impossible, since it's forbidden in Germany - btw, on intension of the USA, since 1945 - to buy or store 'Mein Kampf' outsite scientific purposes.


If that is true (the USA prohibition), and I vaguely recollect that it is true, then the USA erred.

As I posted to Hobitbob:

Quote:
I'm aware that Mein Kampf is prohibited in Germany. Perhaps it's too shaming reminder of Germany's past when it should be seen as an extremely valuable text book on how to detect lying propaganda and lying propagandists.

Yes, I anticipated that it would initially appear offensive until Walter realized that I was sincerely attempting to alert him to what was evidence of his own inverted logic, and would then see it as an act of tough love on my part.


That book is also instructive on the rambling inconsistencies of a sickly evil mind. While it has never been shown that Hitler actually believed what he wrote, it is nonetheless instructive in how far some frauds are willing to go to gain power over the rest of us.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 May, 2004 06:25 pm
OK NOW, BACK TO WORK

Saddam was a sponsor of terrorist groups in that Saddam did finance and funnel weapons and ordinance to Terrorist groups.

Saddam was a sponsor of Osama (see evidence posted above in this forum).

While Osama did declare Saddam a heretic, he took zero action to depose Saddam or kill other Baathists.

Saddam did not want the US to learn that he was a sponsor of Osama, because he realized that the US would for that reason attempt to remove Saddam.

Bush was fearful that Saddam would finance and funnel, weapons and ordinance to Terrorist groups.

Bush was fearful that Saddam would finance and funnel chemical and biological toxins to terrorist groups, and, when Saddam eventually developed them, finance and funnel nuclear weapons to terrorist groups.

Bush pleaded with the leaders of other nations through the UN and outside the UN to join the US in removing Saddam.

Bush formed a coalition of nations to remove Saddam that succeeded in removing Saddam.

Bush told us all multiple times that evolving Iraq into a republic that would not contribute to the terrorism of anyone, would require a significant amount of time, effort and lives.

Bush believes that evolving Iraq into a republic that will not contribute to the terrorism of anyone is a moral and ehtical imperative for the civilized nations of the world.

Bush believes containment of Saddam would have proved no more effective than containment of Ho Chi Minh.

www.britannica.com
Quote:
Vietnam War
(1955–75), a protracted and unsuccessful effort by South Vietnam and the United States to prevent the communists of North Vietnam from uniting South Vietnam with North Vietnam under their leadership.


Bush has made and will undoubtedly make a large number of mistakes in leading the evolution of Iraq into a republic that will not contribute to the terrorism of anyone.

Bush did not anticipate that Syria and Iran would send fighters to kill innocent Iraqies and American troops in an attempt to prevent Iraq from evolving a republic that will not contribute to the terrorism of anyone.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/20/2025 at 09:01:38