Mass Shooting At Denver Batman Movie Premiere

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

You can't steal what you already rightfully own. The West Bank has been Israeli land for some three thousand years.

Alright then. The native american Indians have every right to kick out every non-native in the states according to you.

Not only that but then it also means the germans had every right to kick out the jews in germany.

I doubt you would support either of those yet you use it for an argument. You can't have it work one way and then say no when it is applied somewhere else.

I'm sure there are other places around the world where the land was not "owned" by the current occupiers. So why don't we go around making sure that the original owners get their lands back?

I know why you don't support this idea because you are a supporter of israel and want to continue spreading the lies and bury the crimes that they are committing against the people of palestine.

3 Replies

@Krumple,

Good points.

0 Replies

I enjoy the freedom to own various guns, even though I realise that since everyone else has that freedom, periodic slaughter of innocent people will happen.

No, I don't think my position is irresponsible.

2 Replies

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

I enjoy the freedom to own various guns, even though I realise
that since everyone else has that freedom, periodic slaughter of innocent people will happen.

No, I don't think my position is irresponsible.

Good. It always has.

David

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

the germans had every right to kick out the jews in germany.

Kicked out? If only the Germans had only kicked the Jews out of Germany instead of the mass murder of Jews not only in Germany but anywhere else their military control during WW2.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Krumple wrote:

the germans had every right to kick out the jews in germany.

BillRM wrote:

Kicked out? If only the Germans had only kicked the Jews out of Germany instead of the mass murder of Jews not only in Germany but anywhere else their military control during WW2.

I don't agree with anyone kicking anyone out of any country. That was my point. I don't agree with the extermination of palestinians by the israelis. I think it is ironic that jews constantly claim discrimination but turn around and discriminate against others. No one wants to call them out on it and when they do they get branded as a nazi.

3 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

No one wants to call them out on it and when they do they get branded as a nazi.

When they begin putting people by the frieght car lots in gas chambers then they can be branded Nazis not a moment sooner.

To do otherwise is an insult to the memory of the millions of Jews and non-Jews that was killed by the Nazis.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

extermination of palestinians

What nonsense and it does not help theirs cause when the palaestiinians and their allies call for the wiping out of the Jews and their state.

In other word the only ones calling for an extermination is the palaestinians not the Jews.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Krumple wrote:

oralloy wrote:
You can't steal what you already rightfully own. The West Bank has been Israeli land for some three thousand years.

Alright then. The native american Indians have every right to kick out every non-native in the states according to you.

Not only that but then it also means the germans had every right to kick out the jews in germany.

I doubt you would support either

I think the courts should force the US to honor all the treaties that have been signed with Native Americans.

That would not quite be kicking us out of the US, but it would be a just resolution of the issue.

I am not aware of any case of Jews depriving Germans of their property. However, after WWII, a number of innocent German civilians were unjustly kicked out of a neighboring nation (I forget which one) and had their property stolen.

There was a big fight to weaken European human rights a year or two ago (unfortunately successful) in order to protect that nation from having to restore their stolen property to its rightful owners.

Krumple wrote:

I'm sure there are other places around the world where the land was not "owned" by the current occupiers. So why don't we go around making sure that the original owners get their lands back?

If some group has a credible claim to their former land that they were unjustly deprived of, I think that they should in fact be allowed to claim it.

Krumple wrote:

I know why you don't support this idea because you are a supporter of israel

Ah, but I do support it to some extent.

Krumple wrote:

and want to continue spreading the lies and bury the crimes that they are committing against the people of palestine.

No such lies. No such crimes.

All Israel is doing is defending themselves from people who refuse to make peace. They have the right to defend themselves.

At this point, it is probably too late for the Palestinians to get full 1967 borders, as they may once have achieved had they been willing to make peace. But Israel is only going to annex the greater Jerusalem area and about 10% of the West Bank. The Palestinians still might be able to have their state if they ever decide to try making peace.

2 Replies

@Krumple,

Krumple wrote:

I don't agree with the extermination of palestinians by the israelis.

No such extermination.

0 Replies

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

BillRM wrote:
Have anyone taken notice that when Firefly is back.... on a thread she begin postings cartoons?

That is maybe because your position on gun ownership lends itself most readily to being lampooned in that form.

I don't think that is a fair quotation of what he said. Here is a more accurate quote:

"Have anyone taken notice that when Firefly is back in to the corner of her own illogic on a thread she begin postings cartoons?"

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

All Israel is doing is defending themselves from people who refuse to make peace. They have the right to defend themselves.

This is a lie. It is absurd to even make when the palestinians have no weapons. They don't own tanks, they don't have guns, they don't have any weapons. The israelis use tanks and bombs against them. The ONLY time a palestinian has a bomb is when one failed to explode after the israelis tried to detonate one to kill them with. They take these duds and use them in retaliation. If they get guns it's because they stole them. This is common though in desperate times to defend their homes or their land from foreign invaders.

What do you expect them to do when they are forced out of their homes? Wouldn't you be upset if the army came in and kicked your front door open and told you to get out? Leave everything and never return? You would be having a fit yet you think it is perfectly acceptable for this to happen.

By saying there have been no crimes committed means you ignore all the murders and theft going on against the palestinians.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Now there was waves of people migrating over the land bridge for thousands of years and by the theory/logic I see posted here only the first groups over the land bridge should have any claims on the land not the majority of the so call 'natives' who themselves had seized lands and kill or kicks out members of the first groups.

Whites was just the last large group that migrated to North American and they did not do anything that had not been done time after time before their arrival.

Their technology, larger social organizations and the diseases their bodies carry allowed them in time to be the overall masters of the land but once more their actions was no better or no worst by any moral code then the actions of any others groups on the continent before them.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Krumple wrote:

oralloy wrote:
All Israel is doing is defending themselves from people who refuse to make peace. They have the right to defend themselves.

This is a lie.

No, those statements are factually accurate.

Krumple wrote:

It is absurd to even make when the palestinians have no weapons. They don't own tanks, they don't have guns, they don't have any weapons. The israelis use tanks and bombs against them. The ONLY time a palestinian has a bomb is when one failed to explode after the israelis tried to detonate one to kill them with. They take these duds and use them in retaliation. If they get guns it's because they stole them.

The Palestinians have fired plenty of AK-47s at Israel. They also fire plenty of rocket artillery at Israel.

I can't say whether the Palestinians got these weapons by stealing them, but they certainly have them.

Even without military weapons, the Palestinians are plenty lethal, as they've also thrown stones and molotov cocktails at Israeli soldiers.

Krumple wrote:

This is common though in desperate times to defend their homes or their land from foreign invaders.

This is Israeli land. The foreign invaders are the Palestinians.

Krumple wrote:

What do you expect them to do when they are forced out of their homes? Wouldn't you be upset if the army came in and kicked your front door open and told you to get out? Leave everything and never return? You would be having a fit yet you think it is perfectly acceptable for this to happen.

It must indeed be inconvenient to become used to having stolen property and then have the legitimate owners come and reclaim it.

Best not to steal other people's land in the first place.

Regardless, if they insist on trying to kill innocent Israelis, those Israelis are going to defend themselves. And self defense is not a crime.

Krumple wrote:

By saying there have been no crimes committed means you ignore all the murders and theft going on against the palestinians.

No such murders and no such thefts.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Let see how many times had Israel been attacked by the surrounding countries with the promised that they would be driven into the sea and the land return to the palestinians?

What was in eight armies invaded Israel after they declare their independent so from the start the palestinians allowed themselves to be tools of the enemies of the state of Israels and those who did not leave in 1948 to wait for the surrounding nations to wiped the Israel nation out in large part had citizenship in that nation.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Now there was waves of people migrating over the land bridge for thousands of years and by the theory/logic I see posted here only the first groups over the land bridge should have any claims on the land not the majority of the so call 'natives' who themselves had seized lands and kill or kicks out members of the first groups.

Whites was just the last large group that migrated to North American and they did not do anything that had not been done time after time before their arrival.

Their technology, larger social organizations and the diseases their bodies carry allowed them in time to be the overall masters of the land but once more their actions was no better or no worst by any moral code then the actions of any others groups on the continent before them.

Yes, but it was still wrong of us to violate those treaties after we signed them.

1 Reply

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

I enjoy the freedom to own various guns, even though I realise that since everyone else has that freedom, periodic slaughter of innocent people will happen.

No, I don't think my position is irresponsible.

That is not an accurate reflection of reality: The presence of guns is not the cause of periodic slaughters, which would happen even without guns.

It is also not an accurate reflection of anyone's views: We free Americans all fully understand that our freedom to have guns is not the cause of periodic slaughters.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Agree when it come to for example the so call five civilized tribes however for the western tribes their culture was center in large part in raiding and they tend to make and break treaties themselves.

History is never simple and there tend to be no absolute blacks and whites.

One thing I do not agree with honoring President Jackson by having him on the twenty dollar bill.

First he broke promises to tribes that was his direct allies and did not support the SC ruling concerning not moving the five tribes west of the Mississippi and his pattern of killing men in duals over insults to his wife long after duals was in theory no longer legal.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

We free Americans all fully understand that our freedom to have guns is not the cause of periodic slaughters.

It's odd, then, that almost everyone so inclined first equips himself/themselves with an arsenal of modern firearms and a copious quantity of ammunition.

What could the reason be?

2 Replies

@McTag,

Quote:

It's odd, then, that almost everyone so inclined first equips himself/themselves with an arsenal of modern firearms and a copious quantity of ammunition.

What could the reason be?

You mean that those who had decided to used firearms to do mass murder arm themselves first with such firearms and there is in something odd in so doing?

The gentleman who decided to use a can of gasoline and a match to kill almost forty people went and purchase a can of gasoline and there is nothing odds in doing so.

The man who decided to do mass killing, of hundreds, by using a large amount of homemake explosives went and purchase the materials to do so and there is nothing odds about him doing so.

The young men in england who decided to build suicide bombs to kill their fellow citizens on buses and the subway purchase the materials to do so first.

I know you think you are making a point but I do not see it and if you are claiming that most mass murders are done by firearms that does not seems to be the case.Bombs seems to lead the way in the sheer numbers that are kill of course you do have the box cutters used to take over the planes that kill thousands during 911 along with taking down the twin towers.

0 Replies

Mass Shooting At Denver Batman Movie Premiere

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know