LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   All Hank, all the time. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=734)

Penske_Account 08-10-2006 02:07 PM

Take that, Ned
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Ah, so you reserve the right to color it however you like for purposes that suit the argument. It's a little racism, a little incompetence. Like a little country, a little bit rock n' roll.

Still ignoring that the bulk of the blame falls on Nagin and the state.

Adder 08-10-2006 02:07 PM

Take that, Ned
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Ah, so you reserve the right to color it however you like for purposes that suit the argument. It's a little racism, a little incompetence. Like a little country, a little bit rock n' roll.
Why do they have to be mutually exclusive?

Tyrone Slothrop 08-10-2006 02:10 PM

Take that, Ned
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Ah, so you reserve the right to color it however you like for purposes that suit the argument. It's a little racism, a little incompetence. Like a little country, a little bit rock n' roll.
What Adder said. Also, I don't feel like arguing about what racism is. Did anyone in the White House say, "The hell with all those blacks in New Orleans"? No. Would more federal helicopters have been sent sooner if a bunch of homeowners had been stuck on their roofs in an affluent suburb of Houston? Surely.

Penske_Account 08-10-2006 02:13 PM

Take that, Ned
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
What Adder said. Also, I don't feel like arguing about what racism is. Did anyone in the White House say, "The hell with all those blacks in New Orleans"? No. Would more federal helicopters have been sent sooner if a bunch of homeowners had been stuck on their roofs in an affluent suburb of Houston? Surely.
Houston is not as corrupt as NO so there probably would have been some resolution effected by the government entities that should be first responders, i.e. local and state.

Penske_Account 08-10-2006 02:14 PM

Take that, Ned
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
What Adder said. Also, I don't feel like arguing about what racism is.
Membership in the klan is one indicator, just ask Bobby Byrd.

SlaveNoMore 08-10-2006 02:14 PM

Kos
 
Quote:

taxwonk
Wow. I was beginning to think, based on Penske's shrillness and Slave's idiocy, that perhaps I had hallucinated that.
Walks like a duck. Sounds like a duck.

Penske_Account 08-10-2006 02:16 PM

Kos
 
Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Walks like a duck. Sounds like a duck.
I never thought I would say this, but Slave has my proxy on this one.

Spanky 08-10-2006 02:26 PM

Say it ain't so, Joe
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
A sense of shared humanity, natural rights of man and a respect for international law? Or are those concepts too much to expect from a peoples living with their sensibilities, intellectual and emotional evolution in the 7th Century AD?
Any Jew living anywhere in the world can move to Israel and immediately beceome a resident and a citizens. A Muslim who is from what is now Israel, or who has relatives who now live in Israel can not move to Israel, cant visit Israel, nor become a resident or a citizen. For the occupied territories, millions of muslims are living under occupation and have no say in how they are governed (so much for the natural rights of man). Any Jew living in the occupied territories is allowed to vote and have a say in how they are governed. Muslims are not.

As for the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, those are direct violation of International law.

Natural rights of man? International law? Under these circumstances, why would you expect any Muslim to support Israel?

sebastian_dangerfield 08-10-2006 02:31 PM

Take that, Ned
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Adder
Why do they have to be mutually exclusive?
They aren't. But the Left conveniently remembers one and forgets the other when it suits their purposes.

Penske_Account 08-10-2006 02:31 PM

Say it ain't so, Joe
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
Any Jew living anywhere in the world can move to Israel and immediately beceome a resident and a citizens. A Muslim who is from what is now Israel, or who has relatives who now live in Israel can not move to Israel, cant visit Israel, nor become a resident or a citizen. For the occupied territories, millions of muslims are living under occupation and have no say in how they are governed (so much for the natural rights of man). Any Jew living in the occupied territories is allowed to vote and have a say in how they are governed. Muslims are not.

As for the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, those are direct violation of International law.

Natural rights of man? International law? Under these circumstances, why would you expect any Muslim to support Israel?
Go back to 48, when the Israel and Palestine were created. From the start, while Israel was willing to accept international law, the Arab nations chose to ignore. Everything Israel has done since then has been in self-defense.

If the Arabs want peaceful coexistence, then natural rights and international laws, which they have ignored since 48, need to be acknowledged and respected. Truth is, they want genocide.

As for the changing nature of borders, there are plenty of Pols, Germans and American Indians who would like their former homelands back too. Should we address their concerns? Are they anymore or less legit than the Palis?

Adder 08-10-2006 02:34 PM

Say it ain't so, Joe
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
As for the changing nature of borders, there are plenty of Pols, Germans and American Indians who would like their former homelands back too. Should we address their concerns? Are they anymore or less legit than the Palis?
Um... how about more or less legits than the settlers in the occupied territories?

Spanky 08-10-2006 02:34 PM

London Calling
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
How many natives of ME states? Did you get that yet?
I wouldn't go there. I heard that they were all of Pakistani descent. Maybe not technically natives of the ME, but at least children of natives of the ME.

I believe it is a safe bet that they were all raised in households that used languages from a middle eastern nation.

Penske_Account 08-10-2006 02:36 PM

Say it ain't so, Joe
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Adder
Um... how about more or less legits than the settlers in the occupied territories?

I am pro-annexation, so I say more legit, certainly, too legit to quit. Word!

Penske_Account 08-10-2006 02:37 PM

London Calling
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
I wouldn't go there. I heard that they were all of Pakistani descent. Maybe not technically natives of the ME, but at least children of natives of the ME.

I believe it is a safe bet that they were all raised in households that used languages from a middle eastern nation.
French?

Tyrone Slothrop 08-10-2006 02:38 PM

Take that, Ned
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
They aren't.
So table the racism thing -- so nice of you to bring it up, though -- and tell me, does Chertoff's incompetence bother you, or you feel good knowing that he's running DHS?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:32 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com