Define conservatism

[palerider]

[And incidentally thanks loads for your help on that other discussion - we managed to muddle through surprisingly well so no worries.]

Sorry. My sister in law (spina biffida patient) started having siezures and my wife's mom called and asked us to come to the hospital. It is a 3 hour drive and I was gone most of the day. By the time I got back, and read the message, the thread looked pretty inactive.

 

[palerider]

Yes, you should.

Well I won't unless you can put together a hell of a lot better argument than you have come up with so far. At this point, it seems that the best you can do is complain about a source that you have yet to prove is wrong. Calling them names doesn't change the factual nature of their information.

 

[Dave]

I have never "excused" violent acts by Muslims.

I have tried to explain what the motivation is. Israel is supplied with cutting edge weaponry, with which it can take down many people at a time. The only response Palestinians can think of as a parallel way of fighting, is the suicide bombing ...because they do not have a superpower arming them.





I'm afraid that does no such thing as 'prove your point'.

The slaughter of Jews was chiefly by Christians in the Crusades; that fact is borne out by so much historical research that if I were you I'd just drop my contention right now.
It was not Muslims who stuffed "nostrils full of nails, and stomachs full of feathers", as the Jewish poem recounts.

Muslims most certainly DID abide in peace beside Jews and other minorities in the Near East - most of the time - for centuries. It is true that they imposed dhimmitude codes which taxed a tribute from non-Muslims, but it was not a draconian tax, and taxing is not specifically an act of war in most circumstances.

I have given you three sources which document what I say here, and if you want to argue with it, then I'll need more than your opinion. Show me a source which contradicts mine.





LOL
Is it my birthday, that you should ask me such an easy one ??
One example of an Israeli offensive that would not have been provoked in any way by Palestinians ...is the act of European Jews moving into their country and getting the UN - out of sympathy about the Holocaust - to declare that area to be "the State of Israel".






Dave, the only thing laughable is your incorrect paraphrase of what I wrote.

I told you that Iran was not corrupt (apostate) in the observance of Islam in the way that the Saudi government was. Any other corruption that may or may not have existed in the Iranian government was not a topic of my post.





Another misquote. I did not say "corporations of Israel". Go back and reread my post please.
Soooo...
Iraq was allowing Islamic terrorists free reign to operate inside its borders, eh?
Prove it.
And if you CAN prove it, then after that show me that there are FEWER Islamic terrorists operating inside the borders now, after four years of this "intervention".






The pattern is that they are not stupid and they know dang well that the "protection of Muslims" is a cover story.

I apologize for misquoting you about corporations and Israel. I mistyped and it should have said "corporations or Israel." Either way, you have yet to prove anything backing up that statement.

Proof that Saddam was funding terrorism and allowing terrorists to operate within its borders:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect5.html

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

How do you consider the formation of a Jewish state to be an offensive act on the part of the Jews? No Arabs were murdered, they were allowed to keep their homes, their land, and their lives really didn't change until Arab aggressors started a war. The only difference is that they now had Jewish neighbors, and we all know that can be hell on earth to a racist.

I would not consider the dhimmitude taxes to really be a peaceful solution. It is nothing more than a mob tactic of demanding a protection fee. When you are told to pay up, or else we kill you, I can hardly see that as a legitimate peace process.

As for U.S. wars and interventions using Muslims as a cover for the true intentions of the government, I ask you only one thing. Prove it.

 

[Lilly Marlene]

I apologize for misquoting you about corporations and Israel. I mistyped and it should have said "corporations or Israel." Either way, you have yet to prove anything backing up that statement.

Thanks for acknowledging the mistype. Dave, if you are ever of a mind to read the entire length of this thread, you will see that this ground has been covered. For now, just to glance the corporate aspect, I will remind you of the 70% (or is it 75% ?) of the Iraqi oil reserved for western corporations, which was struck early last winter.

The part that Israel plays is better discussed in the World Politics, Mideast section ...but I surely hope you have taken a look at the websites I provided, at least the two more prominent ones (cactus.org and mideast.com).

Proof that Saddam was funding terrorism and allowing terrorists to operate within its borders:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect5.html

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

I think it is a little circular to bring agitprop from the whitehouse.gov site in order to prove a point that they are asserting.
But I'll look at that and also the other one you provided, thank you. I'm sorry that I'm so sporadic here these days; I have had a sudden project afoot.

How do you consider the formation of a Jewish state to be an offensive act on the part of the Jews? No Arabs were murdered, they were allowed to keep their homes, their land, and their lives really didn't change until Arab aggressors started a war. The only difference is that they now had Jewish neighbors, and we all know that can be hell on earth to a racist.

You have chosen to believe one version of the story. I hope for your sake you have at least looked at the other version (I know I would never listen to only one side in a dispute). After you go to the cactus and mideast websites, and also the jewsnotzionist sites, you will see how the claim of "racism" can simply not be made in this situation.

I would not consider the dhimmitude taxes to really be a peaceful solution. It is nothing more than a mob tactic of demanding a protection fee. When you are told to pay up, or else we kill you, I can hardly see that as a legitimate peace process.

And of course no one has claimed it was a "peace process". But it does dismantle the argument that neocons routinely advance, about Muslims foaming at the mouth to kill any one who does not believe in their religion.

As for U.S. wars and interventions using Muslims as a cover for the true intentions of the government, I ask you only one thing. Prove it.

Another birthday for me ?

Please acquaint yourself with the "Project for a New American Century".
I rest my case.

 

[Lilly Marlene]

Well I won't unless you can put together a hell of a lot better argument than you have come up with so far. At this point, it seems that the best you can do is complain about a source that you have yet to prove is wrong. Calling them names doesn't change the factual nature of their information.

Except that my argument does not revolve around proving Mr. Winn's "timeline" to be incorrect. As I already told you numerous times, I am fine with carrying on as though it were.

Now let's get to the point.

If these Muslims are the scum of the earth, worshipping a god who is a devil, scheming to kill us in horrific ways ...
what does palerider wish to do about that ?
Here is the answer you have given me thus far on this thread:
'Introduce as many of them to their god as quickly as possible'.
I'm paraphrasing from memory but you either said exactly that or amazingly close to that.
Now ...

1. How many Muslims would you leave alive and still be able to feel your loved ones are safe ...any ?

2. What are we going to use for money to fight long enough to kill this many millions of people ?


I have ideas for a couple more questions but I have to leave now ...
Have a good evening you two,
Lilly

 

[Dave]

Thanks for acknowledging the mistype. Dave, if you are ever of a mind to read the entire length of this thread, you will see that this ground has been covered. For now, just to glance the corporate aspect, I will remind you of the 70% (or is it 75% ?) of the Iraqi oil reserved for western corporations, which was struck early last winter.

The part that Israel plays is better discussed in the World Politics, Mideast section ...but I surely hope you have taken a look at the websites I provided, at least the two more prominent ones (cactus.org and mideast.com).


I think it is a little circular to bring agitprop from the whitehouse.gov site in order to prove a point that they are asserting.
But I'll look at that and also the other one you provided, thank you. I'm sorry that I'm so sporadic here these days; I have had a sudden project afoot.

You have chosen to believe one version of the story. I hope for your sake you have at least looked at the other version (I know I would never listen to only one side in a dispute). After you go to the cactus and mideast websites, and also the jewsnotzionist sites, you will see how the claim of "racism" can simply not be made in this situation.

And of course no one has claimed it was a "peace process". But it does dismantle the argument that neocons routinely advance, about Muslims foaming at the mouth to kill any one who does not believe in their religion.

Another birthday for me ?

Please acquaint yourself with the "Project for a New American Century".
I rest my case.

If you look at Walid Shoebat's site, you can see that the claim of racism does apply in this situation. His first hand experience with the other side of terrorism gives him a level of credibility that you simply can't get from Jews that, for all we know, have never talked to an Arab.

As for the taxes placed on Jews, I do not believe Muslims are foaming at the mouth to kill non-believers, I believe that many Muslims wish to oppress anyone that will prevent Islam from becoming the dominant force in every area of the Middle East, and eventually the world. Israelis have reached such numbers that the cannot be oppressed, therefore the solution for them is death.

I'm familiar with the PNAC and their membership. That fact does nothing to prove motive in any of America's military intervention, especially motive in leaning toward corporations or Israel.

 

[The Founders Intent]

Follow the Constitution as intended.

 

[vyo476]

Follow the Constitution as intended.

Ladies and gentlemen, the can of worms has been opened.