Message-ID: <000e01c26a00$4e083460$a6980c3f@wsp01>
From: fred at the-debaters.com (M L Lynch [ SotG ])
Subject: Do Terrorists Really Have More Fun?

> arial sharon?  that guy is not in jail, and has the support of the .us, so
> indeed he cannot be a terrorist.  ignore the fact that the un and various
> ngo's are a "tad suspicious" of certain events surrounding the
> entire palestine/israel conflict.

I think they are a bit more than a "tad suspicious" (-: If they are not
however, it is because they choose to ignore the facts.

Way back when, in 1953, a U.N observer witnessed Sharon's elite 101 comanado
unit slaughter 69 innocent civilians in Qibya.

Sharon had an excuse thou (ofcourse), he and his men didn't know there were
people hidding in the 47 houses they blew up... for no reason... however as
was described in a letter to the president of the United Nations SecC most
of the bodies were rittled with bullets and were found in the door ways of
houses, and even out side.

Sharon has also freely admitted that way way way back when, in the late
1940's his unit, the Alexandroni company, killed 200 un-armed Arab soldiers
after they had surrendered.

Further more, before becoming a member of the party Sharon was heavily
involved with the Zionism groups which are well known/proven to have
associated with the Nazi's ... I mean wtf is the go with that!

Anyway, that is my rant for the nite... power to what ever cuase this is...
lol

cheers

MLL.Fred

ps... you no like my writtingz well ,,|,,(0_o),,|,, I DON'T CARE ... lol

----- Original Message -----
From: <silvio@....net.au>
To: "John" <johnpf@...et.net.au>
Cc: <full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Do Terrorists Really Have More Fun?


> On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 03:38:31PM +1000, John wrote:
> > sockz loves you wrote:
> >
> > >hmm...  how is this known?  has richard or yourself ever met a
terrorist?  are you yourself a terrorist?  i question the basis for
> > >the writer's judgement here.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Sockz, you are so right here. I find it very hard to fit Nelson Mandela,
> > Steven Beeko, Arial Sharon, Yassur Arafat, George Dubya Jnr or Carlos in
> > the model being put forward by our gobbling friend.
> >
> > Actually, George Dubya Jnr probably does fit that model the more I think
> > of it...
> >
> > JPF
>
> [ disclaimer.. i'm a hobbiest commentator as all healthy <terrorist
[hating]>
>   people should be, so excuse the inaccuracies please ]
>
> was the independance of india a continual terrorist act with an attempt to
> cause political change - possibly by "inciting" violent reactions from
> the prevailing leadership?
>
> in the american cival war.. who were the terrorists?  i'm not an american
> history buff though (hell.. i've never even read about it in school).
>
> how many terrorists were arrested pre civil rights movement (modern usage)
> in america?  afaik, it was a preconception that one of the many reasons
for
> segration, was because it was necessary to control the inert mindset of
> a black individuals terrorist nature.
>
> being suspected of being a terrorist, doesnt make it so you can be held
> in custody without freedom of information and basic human and civil
rights.
> what is the philosophy of civil rights?  surely, its to deny them
> given enough thought police (of the precongnitive kind).  in essence to
> protect those who do not know what their own civil rights are.  ie, the
> government shall provide protection for those who do not know what
> civil rights are and for those who dare not question them.
>
> one must remember that democracy is infact the purist form of pluralism
> there is.  an example of this is in Australia where up until the late
> 70's (or was it the 80's), compulsary voting in australia
> was legislated differently for our "natives".  [ Australia is a country
which
> legislates compulsary voting ].   However, thankfully even though the
human
> rights laws predate this time, black australians were under a "seperate"
law
> to determine government representation of the country they live in.  For
> them it was optional.
>
> That is not to say voting should or should not be compulsary, but simply
> indicative of the various legislation for us/them - and especially how
> we define who "they" are.
>
> back to something relating to your post ;-)
>
> in terms of nelson mandela. that guy was in jail for how long? indeed he
was a
> terrorist.  south africa didn't play cricket in australia for a long
> time though because of the entire "black" thing.  i think many
> terrorists were arrested during wonderful apartie (sp?) :(
>
> arial sharon?  that guy is not in jail, and has the support of the .us, so
> indeed he cannot be a terrorist.  ignore the fact that the un and various
> ngo's are a "tad suspicious" of certain events surrounding the
> entire palestine/israel conflict.
>
> yassur arafat.  considering that he is "responsible" for the mass suicide
> bombers but was under house arrest for some period of time for the same
> duration.  his terrorist actions are clear.  likewise, considering that
> palestine always causes conflict, and isreal is "forced" to respond, then
> certainly this is acceptable.
>
> mind you.. the entire israel/palestine conflict is obviously not a
"whitehat"
> affair on either end.. its definately grey, but isreal is certainly not
> what i'd call a nice "camp".
>
> </rant without point>
>
> --
> Silvio
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists