Hypocrisy! (Political not USA)

[R. Richard]

The Palestinians send their children and their women to die as homicide bombers while killing Israeli civilians. Suddenly we have Palestinian militant leader Ahmed Saadat and several dozen Palestinian police officers trapped by Israeli forces in a Jericho prison. Do they fight to the death to set an example for the Palestinians whom they ask for their lives? No, they meekly walk out with their hands up. Yet, they are willing to let other Palestinians die in the struggle against Israel. Hypocrisy! Comment?

Palestinian Militant Surrenders at Prison
By SARAH EL DEEB, Associated Press Writer

JERICHO, West Bank - Israeli military officials said Tuesday that Palestinian militant leader Ahmed Saadat has surrendered at a Jericho prison where he had been holed up.

Several dozen Palestinian police officers also surrendered to Israeli forces at the prison, walking out with their hands raised.

Earlier, Israeli soldiers using helicopters, tanks and bulldozers burst into the prison, removing dozens of inmates in a raid targeting militants convicted of killing an Israeli Cabinet minister.

Palestinians, furious about the raid that also left two Palestinians dead, attacked offices linked to America and Europe, torching the British Council building in Gaza City and kidnapping foreigners, including an American professor, a Red Cross worker, two South Korean journalists and two Australian teachers at an American school.

The American, English professor Douglas Johnson, was seized while buying something from a street vendor, American University officials said. He was freed hours later.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The Palestinians send their children and their women to die as homicide bombers while killing Israeli civilians. Suddenly we have Palestinian militant leader Ahmed Saadat and several dozen Palestinian police officers trapped by Israeli forces in a Jericho prison. Do they fight to the death to set an example for the Palestinians whom they ask for their lives? No, they meekly walk out with their hands up. Yet, they are willing to let other Palestinians die in the struggle against Israel. Hypocrisy! Comment?

Palestinian Militant Surrenders at Prison
By SARAH EL DEEB, Associated Press Writer

JERICHO, West Bank - Israeli military officials said Tuesday that Palestinian militant leader Ahmed Saadat has surrendered at a Jericho prison where he had been holed up.

Several dozen Palestinian police officers also surrendered to Israeli forces at the prison, walking out with their hands raised.

Earlier, Israeli soldiers using helicopters, tanks and bulldozers burst into the prison, removing dozens of inmates in a raid targeting militants convicted of killing an Israeli Cabinet minister.

Palestinians, furious about the raid that also left two Palestinians dead, attacked offices linked to America and Europe, torching the British Council building in Gaza City and kidnapping foreigners, including an American professor, a Red Cross worker, two South Korean journalists and two Australian teachers at an American school.

The American, English professor Douglas Johnson, was seized while buying something from a street vendor, American University officials said. He was freed hours later.

You sound surprised RR. Very Few military or terrorist organizations have leaders with the guts to do as they direst their troops to do. Leading from the front and dying for honor among the generals went out of style pretty much at the end of the civil war.

Japanese leadersin World War II were an exception, as were many british officers in World War I. But by and large, the men who order others to hold at all costs and fight to the last man, aren't capable of sacrificing themselves with the same blaze' attitude.

There are exceptional officers, Rommel led from the Front, Simon Bolivar Buckner was killed in action on Okinowa, Admiral Phillips of the Royal Navy, etc. But most are like McAurhter, who escaped to preseve their unique "abilites" which must not be sacrificed. There is an enormous amont of ego that comes with being a leader, and for most, their courage to fight to the last man, stops when they happen to be the last man.

 

[Liar]

Comment?

Since when are leaders known to do the dirty work of bleeding for their country? heroic deaths are for heroes. This guy's a politician.

 

[R. Richard]

Colly:
If you don't lead from the front, you don't lead! Been there, done that.

Liar:
Of course the guy is a politician. But for even a politician to run with the scumbag police is really low!

JMNTHO.

 

[Boxlicker101]

It's interesting that so many of the terrorists are also members of the Palestinian police force. Supposedly, they are supposed to be preventing violations of the law, not fomenting them.

In all honesty, there are few female homocide bombers and the "children" are usually men in their late teens or twenties.

 

[3113]

No, they meekly walk out with their hands up. Yet, they are willing to let other Palestinians die in the struggle against Israel. Hypocrisy! Comment?

I certainly agree it's Hypocrisy, and I'm in tune with your outrage, RR. But it does seem kinda moot to point out that they're being hypocrites. I mean, you scream "hypocrisy" at someone when they argue for tougher laws against drug-additicts, yet go into rehab themselves when they're addicted to pain-killers.

When someone has talked others into suicide bombings, killing these young people and all the innocents in the bombing, it seems rather pointless to argue that they're being hypocrites. You might as well scold Charles Manson for hypocrisy because he sent others to brutally murder people instead of going himself.

Being a hypocrite is the least of their crimes...and they're hardly going to bow their heads in shame over it. And I seriously doubt that the people following them are going to be disillusioned either. If the people following them are willing to strap bombs to themselves, they're certainly capable of excusing hypocritical behavior in their leaders.

Once again, not that I don't share your anger. Just an observation.

 

[R. Richard]

It's interesting that so many of the terrorists are also members of the Palestinian police force. Supposedly, they are supposed to be preventing violations of the law, not fomenting them.

In all honesty, there are few female homocide bombers and the "children" are usually men in their late teens or twenties.

Of late, the use of female homicide bombers is up. It is apparently getting harder to smuggle males into Israel.

As to the "children," I was referring to mental age.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colly:
If you don't lead from the front, you don't lead! Been there, done that.

Liar:
Of course the guy is a politician. But for even a politician to run with the scumbag police is really low!

JMNTHO.

I would disagree. Omar Bradley was a fine leader, but his HQ was at sea until the beachhead was secured. Ike was in England.

Admiral Nimitz was as fine a commander as this country has ever produced, but he never tried to lead from a sea going command. There was no lack of courage in his case, it was simply impossible to command seaborn operations on the scale of those in the pacific from a ship. The Japanese never did learn that and paid dearly for it.

In basic, leading from the front becomes more and more difficult, as you progress in the size of the command. Modern warfare demands communications and information and you simply can't get that in full measure at the front. So a tactical commander can lead from the front, but his superior had better be in a read area with full communications facilites or the tactical commander is likely to get some rude shocks.

WW II in the Pacific is a good example. Halsey and Spruance were at sea, and lead from the front (or close to it considering the front was anywahere in reach of enemy planes) while nimitz fed them steady streams of information and made decision based on a broader view. Even at sea, Halsey moved his flag from a carrier to the New Jersy, not from fear, but because the Iowa class battleships enjoyed some of the best communication and detection gear a tactical commander could hope to have.

 

[Stella_Omega]

"Forward" he cried, from the rear
And the front rank died
The generals sat and the lines on the map
Moved from side to side

So, what else is new?

 

[Pure]

Colly, I think it makes sense not to put generals at a front, and as you say some, like Patton (my example; Rommel is yours), do not lack nerve or dedication.

Politicians, OTOH, are often not involved in the dyin', and lately their kids (for the US) aren't either. Neo cons, it seems, has specific aversions to military service, with Rumsfeld being an odd exception.

If I might mention a bit of flummery, not exactly hypocrisy. In WWII, the US population had to make sacrifices and did; wars cost. Beginning in Vietnam, but greatly intensified of late is the idea of bread and circuses at home, while the soldiers fight and die; the costs of the war are paid by Chinese bond buyers. Probably the reason is that, while the population will sacrifice for genuine reasons, they--so the politicians realize-- are not so eager to sacrifice so that a sham election may be held in Outer Slobobia, or so that US-friendly crooks, instead of others, continue to rule.

 

[R. Richard]

I would disagree. Omar Bradley was a fine leader, but his HQ was at sea until the beachhead was secured. Ike was in England.

Admiral Nimitz was as fine a commander as this country has ever produced, but he never tried to lead from a sea going command. There was no lack of courage in his case, it was simply impossible to command seaborn operations on the scale of those in the pacific from a ship. The Japanese never did learn that and paid dearly for it.

In basic, leading from the front becomes more and more difficult, as you progress in the size of the command. Modern warfare demands communications and information and you simply can't get that in full measure at the front. So a tactical commander can lead from the front, but his superior had better be in a read area with full communications facilites or the tactical commander is likely to get some rude shocks.

WW II in the Pacific is a good example. Halsey and Spruance were at sea, and lead from the front (or close to it considering the front was anywahere in reach of enemy planes) while nimitz fed them steady streams of information and made decision based on a broader view. Even at sea, Halsey moved his flag from a carrier to the New Jersy, not from fear, but because the Iowa class battleships enjoyed some of the best communication and detection gear a tactical commander could hope to have.

Colly:
I agree 100% with your analysis, as far as it goes. I was a tactical commander and I had to do what I did based upon my own info. A strategic commander needs to be in a rear area where he can collect and analyze the information necessary to make strategic decision.

However, if you are a leader and find yourself in a front lines situation, then you lead. If you fail to lead from the front when it is a tactical necessity, then you are a coward and a hypocrit.

It might seem safe aboard a carrier. However the skipper of a WW II carrier was constantly faced with a simple tactical decision. At sone point in time he had to turn his carrier into the wind and launch his aircraft. At that point in time, the skipper had to depend upon his aircraft to protect the carrier. That is when a man depends not only upon his own leadership, but the leadership of those in his crew!

 

[Rope64]

The Palestinians send their children and their women to die as homicide bombers while killing Israeli civilians. Suddenly we have Palestinian militant leader Ahmed Saadat and several dozen Palestinian police officers trapped by Israeli forces in a Jericho prison. Do they fight to the death to set an example for the Palestinians whom they ask for their lives? No, they meekly walk out with their hands up. Yet, they are willing to let other Palestinians die in the struggle against Israel. Hypocrisy! Comment?

Lemme see, RR: you choose to use the phrase "homicide bombers" rather than the more usual phrase, and yet you think there is some hypocrisy in this leader not giving up his life in a futile attack against an awaiting military force ...

Who suffers from cognitive dissonance?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colly:
I agree 100% with your analysis, as far as it goes. I was a tactical commander and I had to do what I did based upon my own info. A strategic commander needs to be in a rear area where he can collect and analyze the information necessary to make strategic decision.

However, if you are a leader and find yourself in a front lines situation, then you lead. If you fail to lead from the front when it is a tactical necessity, then you are a coward and a hypocrit.

It might seem safe aboard a carrier. However the skipper of a WW II carrier was constantly faced with a simple tactical decision. At sone point in time he had to turn his carrier into the wind and launch his aircraft. At that point in time, the skipper had to depend upon his aircraft to protect the carrier. That is when a man depends not only upon his own leadership, but the leadership of those in his crew!

I think the main thing here is I am using a broader defintion of leader than you are

A tactical commander has to lead by example in most situations. The smaller th eunit action, the more vital it is to have that kind of leadership.

A strategic commander, has to have the facilites that are generally not possible to maintain in a tactical situation.

As to terrorist leaders, they tend to operate by remote control and are generally killed miles from any percieved danger. It's only the smnart one, who recognize there is no place miles away from danger for them.

 

[R. Richard]

Lemme see, RR: you choose to use the phrase "homicide bombers" rather than the more usual phrase, and yet you think there is some hypocrisy in this leader not giving up his life in a futile attack against an awaiting military force ...

Who suffers from cognitive dissonance?

I think you do.

Ahmed Saadat sends Palestinian homicide bombers to die in an attempt to kill Israeli civilians. The murder missions are cited by Ahmed Saadat and the rest of the Palestinian "leadership" as one of the few means the Palestinians have of striking at "the Zionist Entity" [Israel.] Yet, when the same Ahmed Saadat has a chance to give up his life while attempting to kill Israelis, he shows himself to be a coward, a liar and a false follower of Allah.

If Ahmed Saadat had died in battle against the unbeliever Israelis, he would have been immediately translated to Paradise where 72 houris would await him. [Check your Muslim holy books.] Thus, Ahmed Saadat would not have given up his life by an attack upon the Israelis, he would simply have moved to another plane of existence. The foregoing leads us inescapbaly to the conclusion the Ahmed Saadat is not a true follower of Allah. [By the way, your use of the phrase "futile attack" disrespects Islam.]

Ahmed Saadat had stated that he would die rather than surender to the Israelis. He surrendered, he is a liar.

Finally, the apostate Ahmed Saadat asks others to do what he will not do. He encourages and orders others to die, while he himself lives rather than provide an example to his followers. Ahmed Saadat is a coward.

QED

 

[Rope64]

Well, I think you're just stupid, RR. And racist.

Ahmed Saadat is a head of the PFLP, which is a communist and not an Islamic organization -- he's probably an atheist. But I suppose that mild fact would stand in the way of your racist smear that "The Palestinians send their children and their women to die as homicide bombers."

Now, it is true that Saadat said he would not surrender, but he did. So he is a liar.

But you are still racist and stupid.

 

[R. Richard]

Well, I think you're just stupid, RR. And racist.

Ahmed Saadat is a head of the PFLP, which is a communist and not an Islamic organization -- he's probably an atheist. But I suppose that mild fact would stand in the way of your racist smear that "The Palestinians send their children and their women to die as homicide bombers."

Now, it is true that Saadat said he would not surrender, but he did. So he is a liar.

But you are still racist and stupid.

From Wikipedia:
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) (Arabic الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين - al-jabhah al-sha`biyyah li-tahrīr filastīn) is a Marxist-Leninist, nationalist Palestinian political and military organization, founded in 1967. It has consistently been the second-largest of the groups forming the Palestinian Liberation Organization (the largest being Fatah), but now has only limited popular support in the Palestinian Territories. It has generally taken a hard line on Palestinian national aspirations, opposing the more moderate stance of Fatah. It opposed the Oslo Accords and was for long opposed to the idea of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but in 1999 came to an agreement with the PLO leadership on the pursuit of negotiations with Israel.

It would appear that if the PFLP is not an Islamic organization, at least most of its membership is Islamic. Also, it is a Palestinian organization, per Wikipedia. Perhaps you would be so kind as to elucidate as to why the PFLP is not an Islamic organization.

My race is Caucasian. If I am racist, precisely what race am I against? [By the way, there is very little genetic difference between the original Jews and Arabs. I say original Jews, because during the diaspora many other racial and/or ethnic groups were mixed in with the original Jews. Also, neither Jews nor Arabs consitute a race.]

You cite:
your racist smear that "The Palestinians send their children and their women to die as homicide bombers."

The Palestinians themselves admit that they send Palestinians to die as "suicide" bombers. Since the admitted aim is to kill as many Israelis as practical, I use the word "homicide" rather than "suicide."

From world news reports, many of the Palestinian homicide bombers are women and/or children. If the reports are inaccurate, please cite your sources.

Rope64, it is normally accepted that when one side in a discussion restorts to personal attacks, that side has lost the discussion. If you don't like what I have to say, then show me wherw I am wrong.

 

[Rope64]

Gosh, where to start?

The Palestinians themselves admit that they send Palestinians to die as "suicide" bombers.

"The Palestinians themselves admit ..." What is "the Palestinians," RR? Is it some super-monster that you have been having conversations with? Or is it a very diverse group of people, a very small percentage of whom have ever been involved in any way in sending anyone to die?

Would you consider the manner in which you smeared all of the Palestinian people to be a resort to a "personal attack?" I would.

 

[Rope64]

Mind you, R. Richard, I would not really care that you are stupid except that you are also writing hateful and false things. If you'd stop either being hateful or being false, I'd have no real problem with you.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Gosh, where to start?



"The Palestinians themselves admit ..." What is "the Palestinians," RR? Is it some super-monster that you have been having conversations with? Or is it a very diverse group of people, a very small percentage of whom have ever been involved in any way in sending anyone to die?

Would you consider the manner in which you smeared all of the Palestinian people to be a resort to a "personal attack?" I would.

You didn't ask me but I suppose "The Palestinians" would be the people of Palestine, the people who recently voted for Hamas, the organization that is loudly praising and encouraging homocide bombers.

I refer to them in that way because that is their intention. If they went to some isolated place and blew themselves up, I could call them suicide bombers. However, their intention is to kill as many people as they can, in other words to commit as many homocides as possible.

A "personal attack" would usually be defined as saying personally insulting things, such as calling somebody a liar or a racist or stupid.

 

[R. Richard]

Gosh, where to start?



"The Palestinians themselves admit ..." What is "the Palestinians," RR? Is it some super-monster that you have been having conversations with? Or is it a very diverse group of people, a very small percentage of whom have ever been involved in any way in sending anyone to die?

Would you consider the manner in which you smeared all of the Palestinian people to be a resort to a "personal attack?" I would.

Well, Rope64, you could start by not addressing the issues you raise. No wait! You already did that.

"The Palestinians" is a group of people who are represented by something called the Palestinian National Authority [usually called the Palestinian Authority or PA.] The PA is a very small percentage of the Palestinian people. The PA is supposedly run by a President, currently Mahmoud Abbas [stay tuned for late breaking changes here], and governed by the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). The PLC is effectively under control of something called Hamas. You can Google up the Hamas Charter which calls for the destruction of Israel. Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the PFLP routinely take credit for homicide bombings in Israel.

The very small percentage of Palestinians who are running a quasi government not only admit that they are using homicide bombers [they use the term martyrs], they brag about it!

All of what I have stated is fact and can be easily verified.

However there is a larger Palestinian problem. Said larger Palestinian is the apologists for the actions of the people who run the PA. You, Rope64 are such an apologist.

Fropm Yahoo News:
Palestinians Attack Foreigners After Raid
AP - 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Palestinian police whisked foreigners to safety, and several international relief agencies closed in the Palestinian territories on Tuesday in response to the kidnapping of aid workers and journalists by angry militants. Gunmen abducted 10 journalists and aid workers and vandalized offices linked to the U.S. and Britain, in the most violent campaign against foreigners in recent memory in the Palestinian territories.

Of course, only a very small percentage of the Palestinian people were involved in the current kidnappings and rioting. And, of course, only a very small percentage of the Palestinian people were involved in past kidnappings and rioting. And, of course, the PA can't control the small percentage of evil Palestinians. And, of course, a government [or quai government] that can't control its people is not a government. Except to people like you, Rope64. There is no point in my responding to you until you see fit to issue a public apology for your boorish behavior.

 

[Rope64]

You didn't ask me but I suppose "The Palestinians" would be the people od Palestine, the people who recently voted for Hamas, the organization that is loudly praising and encouraging homocide bombers.

Well, if Hamas is loudly praising and encouraging homicide bombers, it should be easy for you to find a nice juicy quote demonstrating exactly that. Please do so. I can show where they offered a ten year truce to Israel.

A "personal attack" would usually be defined as saying personally insulting things, such as calling somebody a liar or a racist or stupid.

Sometimes, however, that's just a simple statement of fact.

Did you say that Irish Catholics send people to blow up buses and torture people during the IRA conflict? Or are you just a liar or a racist or stupid?

Did you ever wonder why certain liars and racists and idiots think it's okay to smear Palestinians as broadly as you and R. Richard have? What sort of moral depredation do you suppose it takes for a society to fall so low as to find such vileness acceptable?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
You didn't ask me but I suppose "The Palestinians" would be the people od Palestine, the people who recently voted for Hamas, the organization that is loudly praising and encouraging homocide bombers.

Well, if Hamas is loudly praising and encouraging homicide bombers, it should be easy for you to find a nice juicy quote demonstrating exactly that. Please do so. I can show where they offered a ten year truce to Israel.

Quote:
A "personal attack" would usually be defined as saying personally insulting things, such as calling somebody a liar or a racist or stupid.


Sometimes, however, that's just a simple statement of fact.

Did you say that Irish Catholics send people to blow up buses and torture people during the IRA conflict? Or are you just a liar or a racist or stupid?

Did you ever wonder why certain liars and racists and idiots think it's okay to smear Palestinians as broadly as you and R. Richard have? What sort of moral depredation do you suppose it takes for a society to fall so low as to find such vileness acceptable?

Since you know neither R Richard nor me, anything you say about either of us is your opinion, not a statement of fact.

I have said something to the effect that the IRA committed acts of terrorism. In effect, that is saying Irish did such things. However, I would never mention their religion.

I have never "smeared" Palestininians, which is to say I have never said untrue negatives about them. I did say words to the effect that many homocide bombers are Palestinians, which is common knowledge. I also said they recently elected Hamas, which is also a well known fact.

As R Richard has said, you can google Hamas to learn their opinion of what they call "martyrs".

 

[Rope64]

Well, Rope64, you could start by not addressing the issues you raise. No wait! You already did that.

Richard, you have to understand that I view conversing with you as being something like conversing with a dog. A dog can be fairly easily trained to bark or to attack in certain situations, and to do so in absolute comfort and conviction. The reason it does so is that it has been given pats on the head or Scooby snacks for behaving in the desired manner, but it has no real sense of this: it just gets a warm, pleasant feeling conditioned on the desired behavior.

Similarly, you and people like you bray at appropriate instances in ways that you have been conditioned to bray. Maybe you think it makes you "one of the guys;" who knows. At a different time, people like you would have thrown rocks at school buses bringing black children to white neighborhoods or the like, with a similar degree of senselessness. It doesn't really matter: where there is no moral understanding, there can be no guilt.

Now, you obviously don't know shit about shit. You probably shouldn't even walk to the corner store, as clueless as you are. (See, this is where the dog who has done wrong gets his face rubbed in it; THAT, a dog understands -- it does not require moral understanding.)

If you have any sense, R. Richard, and I sense that you do not, you will just accept that you don't know shit about the Palestinians, and that you just shouldn't comment on them one way or the other until you know something. If you don't believe me, just look up what the attitude of Marxism-Leninism to religion of any sort -- can you see how the more you wrote, the more stupid you looked?

"The Palestinians" is a group of people who are represented by something called the Palestinian National Authority [usually called the Palestinian Authority or PA.] The PA is a very small percentage of the Palestinian people. The PA is supposedly run by a President, currently Mahmoud Abbas [stay tuned for late breaking changes here], and governed by the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). The PLC is effectively under control of something called Hamas. You can Google up the Hamas Charter which calls for the destruction of Israel. Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the PFLP routinely take credit for homicide bombings in Israel.

Is America the country that dropped two atomic weapons on Japan during World War II? And what did Japan do to deserve this? And how does Japan's transgression compare with what has been done to the Palestinians? I just thought since you've been looking things up, you might want to think about those sorts of things, which probably don't even require any research on your part.

The very small percentage of Palestinians who are running a quasi government not only admit that they are using homicide bombers [they use the term martyrs], they brag about it!

All of what I have stated is fact and can be easily verified.

Good. Then find Hamas bragging about homicide bombers.

However there is a larger Palestinian problem. Said larger Palestinian is the apologists for the actions of the people who run the PA. You, Rope64 are such an apologist.

Uh, actually, I would say that the larger Palestinian problem is that there is a colonial society that has been forced upon them with the support of Western Powers, particularly in recent years the US. Somehow I suspect, R. Richard, that if you had to put up with the injustice that the Palestinians have had to swallow, you'd make Hamas look like the Cub Scouts. A leader leads, right?

From Yahoo News:
Palestinians Attack Foreigners After Raid
AP - 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Palestinian police whisked foreigners to safety, and several international relief agencies closed in the Palestinian territories on Tuesday in response to the kidnapping of aid workers and journalists by angry militants. Gunmen abducted 10 journalists and aid workers and vandalized offices linked to the U.S. and Britain, in the most violent campaign against foreigners in recent memory in the Palestinian territories.

Of course, only a very small percentage of the Palestinian people were involved in the current kidnappings and rioting. And, of course, only a very small percentage of the Palestinian people were involved in past kidnappings and rioting. And, of course, the PA can't control the small percentage of evil Palestinians. And, of course, a government [or quai government] that can't control its people is not a government. Except to people like you, Rope64. There is no point in my responding to you until you see fit to issue a public apology for your boorish behavior.

Now, you idiot R. Richard, you've done it again. Do you understand why "offices linked to the U.S. and Britain" were targetted? As much as it suits your bigotry to portray the actions as mindless violence, the US and Britain -- that would be our elected governments -- pretty clearly screwed the Palestinians on this one, in cooperation with Israel. Didn't they? It would be almost as if Americans took as hostages hundreds of Arabs and Muslims after 9/11 -- wait a minute, we did do that, didn't we? And not just in mobs -- our elected government did it for us! How about that!

 

[Rope64]

Since you know neither R Richard nor me, anything you say about either of us is your opinion, not a statement of fact.

I have said something to the effect that the IRA committed acts of terrorism. In effect, that is saying Irish did such things. However, I would never mention their religion.

I have never "smeared" Palestininians, which is to say I have never said untrue negatives about them. I did say words to the effect that many homocide bombers are Palestinians, which is common knowledge. I also said they recently elected Hamas, which is also a well known fact.

As R Richard has said, you can google Hamas to learn their opinion of what they call "martyrs".

I guess you couldn't find that juicy quote from Hamas that proves your assertion, huh? Don't feel bad: neither could I.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I guess you couldn't find that juicy quote from Hamas that proves your assertion, huh? Don't feel bad: neither could I.

I didn't look for it, for the same reason I wouldn't bother researching to learn the name of the first US president, or the capital of Michigan or the chemical symbol of sodium. If I already know something, I don't bother to look it up. Here is a link to the appropriate info. It was the first item when I googled "hamas charter".

http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm