A new low...even for liberal anti-war protesters

In practical and achievable terms do you consider the two equal?


Or do you believe eggs become harder to unscramble after time goes by?

I have a question for all of the people on here that think Israel should give up all the land it captured after the 6 day war.

Should the US give up all the land we took after the various Indian wars?

mysteryman wrote:

I have a question for all of the people on here that think Israel should give up all the land it captured after the 6 day war.

Should the US give up all the land we took after the various Indian wars?

sure wouldn't leave much of the good old usa, would it ?

by giving up gaza, rather than a portion of the west bank, israel has already set themselves up for more trouble. palestine over here and palestine over there, with israel in between. how the hell does that work ?

in a perfect world, it would be better if israel and it's arabic neighbors all freely contributed small portions in the correct areas to establish a palestinian state.

unfortunately, none of the arab countires are much interested in helping their brothers in islam out.

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

I have a question for all of the people on here that think Israel should give up all the land it captured after the 6 day war.

Should the US give up all the land we took after the various Indian wars?

sure wouldn't leave much of the good old usa, would it ?

by giving up gaza, rather than a portion of the west bank, israel has already set themselves up for more trouble. palestine over here and palestine over there, with israel in between. how the hell does that work ?

in a perfect world, it would be better if israel and it's arabic neighbors all freely contributed small portions in the correct areas to establish a palestinian state.

unfortunately, none of the arab countires are much interested in helping their brothers in islam out.

This is one of the few things you have said that I agree with.
Israel made a strategic error by ceding Gaza.
They should have ceded the west bank,with Jerusalem controlled by the Swiss,ala Tom Clancy's suggestion.

By allowing the Palestinians to have land on both flanks,Israel has put itself in extreme danger,IMHO.
If the Palestinians do make nice,then it might be a good idea,but I dont think they will.

dlowan wrote:

Then have a look at the stuff your friendly chief slimers write.

And tell me they are not accusing her of racism - trumpeting the unsubstantiated accusations with joyous glee, in fact.

Are you saying you do not agree with them?

That is interesting - ad not something I had picked up from your posts which seemed to be joining in happily.

You know dlowan, this might go a heck of a lot faster if you'd just tell me what your talking about, rather than refer to "the stuff your friendly chief slimers write." I don't know to whom you are referring, or what they wrote.

But if "they" are claiming she's racist, please explain how that means I've agreed with them? What have I said that lead you to that conclusion?

A somewhat differing opinion......

The Racism of the Anti War Movement

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

Lash wrote:

"Its a Jew War! The Jews are controlling America!! Stop the Jew War!!!"----racists who agree with Cindy's remark, "My son shouldn't have died for Israel!"

They think she's sympatico. Because she is.

She said it.

it's a pretty big stretch to equate "my son shouldn't have died for israel" to "fire up the furnaces", lash.

I don't think the newly arrived racists at Camp Casey have called for a furnace re-firing, either. They just know she's on their wave-length and feel a sense of belonging.

And, I do have a bit of fun returning the bashing. It's sort of pathetic to sit still and get kicked repeatedly. So, I don't.

The Dems are getting a taste of what they have been dishing out for decades.

And, I'm LOVING IT!!! Karma. Gotta love it!

"Its a Jew War! The Jews are controlling America!! Stop the Jew War!!!"----racists who agree with Cindy's remark, "My son shouldn't have died for Israel!"

They think she's sympatico. Because she is.

She said it.

Quote:

White supremacists claim Cindy's cause
Holding rally: 'We don't want leftist Johnny-come-latelys' to hijack issue
Posted: August 26, 2005
4:00 p.m. Eastern

By Joe Kovacs
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

The latest entrants in the saga of Cindy Sheehan vs. the White House are white supremacists, as they plan to rally against the Iraq War this weekend in Crawford, Texas.

Members of Stormfront.org are tossing their figurative hoods into the mix, as they invite supporters to come to Camp Casey to "let the world know that white patriots were first and loudest to protest this war for Israel."

"We don't want leftist Johnny-come-latelys who are misleadingly protesting this war – as if the war is about oil (not true), or as if it's right-wing patriots who launched this war (not true) – to hijack the issue from us," writes James Kelso, senior moderator of Stormfront.

"We want to challenge these leftists with the fact that their leftist leaders, like Hillary Clinton, are on the same war-for-Israel team as the cowardly Republicans who have been bought and paid for in the Senate, House, White House and media by the Jewish Neocon political machine."

Kelso is an assistant to David Duke, the Ku Klux Klansman and activist for European-Americans who was elected to Louisiana's Legislature in 1989, and more recently has served prison time for mail fraud and filing a false tax return.

Duke, himself, is speaking publicly about the California woman who demands a second meeting with Bush in connection with the war-related death of her son, Casey, who had volunteered in the Army.

In an online column, Duke gives a host of reasons why he believes Cindy Sheehan is right to oppose the conflict in Iraq, among them:

* There were no weapons of mass destruction, no nuclear program, no uranium from Niger, no links with al-Qaida, no imminent threat to the American people;

* if Americans were sent to die for democracy or justice in all the countries of the world we deem unjust or undemocratic, then we must be ready to send millions of our sons and daughters to war all over the globe;

* the war is massively increasing hatred and terrorism. For every one terrorist killed in Iraq, we are creating thousands more who hate and want to hurt America and Americans; and

* it has secured us no new or cheaper oil, it has cost a national treasure of hundreds of billions of dollars, it has alienated friends and allies, it has hurt American business around the world ... .

Duke also claims Sheehan believes her son died for the sake of Israel, though she has repeatedly denied she ever made such a comment.

However, Sheehan did make a connection with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a verbal tirade against the president this month in Dallas, stating:

"You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism."

In a messageboard on Stormfront's website, a member with the pseudonym "Dixie Gal" provides strategy, as well as some practical advice for those attending this weekend's planned rally.

"This war needs to be stopped, our troops brought home. Then our dear president needs to put the troops on the Mexican border, to keep out all these illegals! Have a safe trip, and give Cindy our support! P.S. Don't forget your sunscreen!"

Racists for Cindy!!

Protest the Jew War!!

Have you checked out the popularity of the "protest" at Walter Reed? The soldiers, a lot of them, are giving the **** protesters the single digit salute.

You may be able to see where I am coming from.

As I said, I don't know when the racist canard beggan - I suspect way before my quotes.

deb

It's an irony for me as well.

The religious right, though presently in a strategic state of truce with the business/corporate community in the US, must inevitably run into conflicts that will not be breachable. Scientific investigation is one. Profit is another.

dlowan wrote:

You may be able to see where I am coming from.

As I said, I don't know when the racist canard beggan - I suspect way before my quotes.

I actually don't see where you are coming from .... unless you claim that because the word "racism" or "white supremacists" is included in a story we cut and paste, that means we are accusing Sheehan of being a racist.

For example, the story I posted speaks of the white supremacists (racists, I think we all agree) going to Crawford to rally in support of Sheehan against the Iraq war. That neither says, nor did I intend to imply, that Sheehan is a racist just because racist nutjobs have claimed her cause as their own. As Timber correctly summarized, every circus needs a freak show. She is welcome to them.

The story posted by JW speaks to the effect of the anti-war movement, or had the Iraq war not occurred, to adversely affect the Iraqis. And whether you agree with that sentiment or not, the article says that the effect of what the anti-war supporters believe, has the effect of being racist.

I don't know whether JW believes Sheehan to be racist or not, but I do not think you can reach that conclusion because she posted that article, even if you think it accuses Sheehan of being a racist, since as you point out, JW did not state this was her opinion. I, for one, think a person can do things that appear to be racist, but that doesn't necessarily make the person racist. As it relates to the story JW posted, while the claimed effect of what the anti-war protestors believe has a racist effect, I don't think that means the people are racist.

Lash may believe Sheehan is racist against Jews. She might very well be. She certainly has made statements that can cause one to believe that to be a valid conclusion. And Lash may hold that view -- you must ask her. But you really should not ascribe the views of other people to me, merely because my politics and theirs is often in harmony.



(I say that knowing full well I probably lump all you libbies together on a nearly daily basis. )

In his book "Sum of all Fears",his fictional suggestion was for the Swiss to police and control Jerusalem.
They are respected by all sides.
Jerusalem would be governed by a three man council,1 Jew,1 Moslem,and 1 Christian.
All 3 of those people must be highly respected in their respective religions,with impeccable scholarly and religious credentials.

Any decision regarding laws must be made by majority vote of the 3 men.
Israel would have no troops or police in Jerasulem,and neither would the Palestinians.
ALL police duties would be carried out by the Swiss,and they would answer to that 3 man council.

It is the best idea I have ever seen regarding Jerusalem,but its a shame its a fictional solution to a real problem.

Yes - I did lump you together because you were psting in amongst them, and supportively.

What was you actual purpose for cutting and pasting the white supremacist thing if it were not to smear Cindy? Really. What effect do you hope to have by posting these things? What effect do you think you DO have?

Personally, I would be very reluctant to smear, however sophistically and, when called to account, indirectly, someone with the brush of white supremacist.

I think you are being most sophistical. A lawyer thing, perhaps.

Cindy may, or may not, be such.

She appears, as I said, a most unsophisticated being, and such folk are a possible recruitment pool for scum such as white supremacists.

You people have provided no evidence that she is such.

I know you persist in believing that she has expressed views that you have decided - quite illogically, I think - are indicative of anti-Semitism. So - we disagree.

But white supremacist? So far, you have been part of a quite unwarranted smear-fest, I persist in believing.

As I said, I disagree with you re JW's intent.

"I, for one, think a person can do things that appear to be racist, but that doesn't necessarily make the person racist."

THERE we are in agreement.

dlowan wrote:

Yes - I did lump you together because you were psting in amongst them, and supportively.

What was you actual purpose for cutting and pasting the white supremacist thing if it were not to smear Cindy? Really. What effect do you hope to have by posting these things? What effect do you think you DO have?

The purpose of cutting and pasting the white supremacist thing was to point out that they have embraced her movement.

We don't want leftist Johnny-come-latelys who are misleadingly protesting this war as if the war is about oil (not true), or as if it's right-wing patriots who launched this war (not true) to hijack the issue from us.

We want to challenge these leftists with the fact that their leftist leaders, like Hillary Clinton, are on the same War for Israel team as the cowardly Republicans who have been bought and paid for in the Senate, House, White House, and Media by the Jewish Neocon political machine.