I thought he just stated that he was surprised they had not done that? No?
BIG DADDY
Feeling Israel has been VERY thick skinned.
Small nit here Big P Daddy. I realize it’s a long way from Kansas, but prostitution is illegal in Clark County, NV, which includes the City of Las Vegas. It is legal in Storey County, the county line being 50 miles north of Las Vegas at the closest point. As a public service, I will add that although it is also illegal in Washoe County (Reno/Carson City), it is legal in Lyons County, which is only 10 miles from Reno.
No. Given his other comments, it’s clear he thinks it’s justified.
Dooku,
Thanks for the correction, I see your an expert on this. Been to the Bunny Ranch lately?
BIG DADDY
Preffers pulling them out of the Crazy Hourse II.
- It’s in Vegas.
- It’s almost as easy, you just have to have game.
- You get some real hotties and you get em all night.
CfW doesn’t admit to being aware of the historical origins of the phrase he used. You’re interpretation, far from being a fair read of CfW’s “obvious” intention, is completely unsupported by his statement. I read CfW’s point as being that the Palestinian adults bring their condition upon themselves. And the fact that Palestinian children die in the crossfire (and indeed they die as they participate directly in the conflict as well), is a somewhat unfortunate but inevitable result of their parents irresponsibility. You can disagree with his position, but it is quite unfair to put the word genocide into his mouth.
I have heard the phrase “nits make lice” before but never knew the origins. I’m betting that you didn’t know the origin before reading it in this thread. To say that CfW obviously knew the origin is illogical.
BIG_DADDY, I’d be interested in hearing your answer to Gary Kumquat’s post. Namely, if you murder someone, would a just punishment be killing you and nine of your family members?
Regardless of whether or not he knew the origins, he originally used it in the context of advocating the killing of Palestinian children:
from the thread that sparked this:
(note that the first part was quoted from a post by MC Master of Cermonies)
Clint’s oevre here also includes these little gems, from various threads:
Quite a lot of assholery there in a mere 18 threads, and I haven’t quoted it all.
With all due respect, patteeu, are you sure you want to defend this guy? This poor maligned innocent?
Just so that you understand that your discussing a hypothetical here, I’d like to point out that the Israelis don’t intentionally kill the family members of terrorists who attack Israel. They do, however, bulldoze the homes of family members and occasionally family members who refuse to leave are killed in the process.
patteeu <-- confused about where the hypothetical comes from
Giraffe,
I did answer it somewhere but would be glad to repeat it. If it is an isolated incident then it is absolutely not justified. On the other hand if you have a group of militant cowards that prey on citizens and children then that is the only way you can get their people to turn on them and quit harboring them and supporting their needs. The families will change their attitude right away when they realize that they are not walkin away from this with 10k from Saddam and nothing to worry about. When they know that the US military will hunt them down and kill them too you watch how things change. Many of these terrorists do it to take care of their family with that kind of money. That would change right away as well. If you knew there was going to be a serious price to pay for you and yours because of what these knucklheads are doing you are going to be much more willing to turn informant and and/or do what’s necessary to rid yourself of these idiots. It’s not a good or nice thing but is unfortunately necessary. I gotta get out of here for now but thanks for the question.
patteau,
It wasn’t a hypothetical it came initially from me stating that we should smite their terrorist acts 10x and kind of took on a life of it’s own if I recall correctly.
Could you direct me to that thread that sparked this so I can have a look?
I remember that post, but I was just wondering where the part about family members came from. I assumed it was someone who was incorrectly accusing Israel of killing the family members of suicide bombers.
That thread is linked to in the first post in this thread (as is customary in Pit threads).
Tip: if you click on the ‘search’ button underneath a post, it will return all the posts by that user - which is how I located the posts by Clint I quoted.
Thx
Ignorance is fighting back. Call for back up!!!
Let me start by saying that, generally speaking, I side with the Israeli’s in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. This, no doubt, affects my perspective just like the opinions of others color theirs.
OK, I checked out the original thread and this is what I think. CfW is a defender of the Israeli position in this conflict. The majority of contributors to that thread were sympathetic with the Palestinians. I can understand why someone who understands the history of the phrase “nits make lice” would assume that CfW is making a genocidal reference. But given his clarification in this thread, I don’t think he was.
Furthermore, my defense of CfW was initially a defense against what appeared to be a double standard in terms of moderator enforcement of the bulletin board rules. I stand by that defense. CfW was no more outrageous than Shodan who didn’t receive any kind of public warning.
If CfW’s comments are genocidal, then many of the Palestinian supporters in the GD’s thread are filled to the brim with anti-semitism. For the record, I don’t think either is the case.
sigh BIG_DADDY, I shall now attempt the monumental task of trying to answer you. Sit tight, kiddies, cause this’ll take awhile.
I know it’s the Pit, but I’m going to have to ask for a cite for that. (Cite: when you go and look up a reputable source that will confirm your accusation). Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
But kill who, exactly? The terrorists’ families? Random Palestinians? All that will produce is a domino effect. You will radicalize the remainder of the population. Let me demonstrate:
We have Palestinian Terrorist Adam. He is out, terrorizing and whatnot, and this is a bad thing. The Israeli government decides to kill Adam, his brother Non-Terrorist Bob, and his sister Non-Terrorist Candy. What will happen? The surviving relatives of Adam, Bob, and Candy will now have a blood feud with the Israeli government. It doesn’t matter whether or not Adam was in the right. The Israelis have killed family members for no reason other than genetic ties. So then you have the children of Bob and Candy, who were originally Non-Terrorists Dan, Elizabeth, and Fred, who are now triple-pissed at the Israeli government. And for good reason, because the Israeli government killed innocents for no reason other than their family ties.
Another problem with this scenario: okay, terrorists kill 20, Israelis kill 200, what if the terrorists decide to similarly step it up and kill 2000? You get in a stupid and bloody war of escalation, where the only sure thing is that innocents will perish.
The answer is to have terrorists put on trial for their individual crimes, and for a dialogue between the Israeli government and Palestinians who share the goals of the terrorists without advocating their means.
Osama has nothing, repeat, nothing to do with the Israel-Palestine conflict. The Palestinians as a whole could not care less about whether or not America converts to Islam or makes women wear burkas. It’s a total strawman argument.
No.
What country are you talking about here? Afghanistan? Israel? Palestine?
Re: First Amendment rights and freedom of religion. Not to mention the fact that Islam has little or nothing to do with the craziness of bin Laden. If the Middle East was Christian he’d be demanding that we all convert to Arab Orthodoxy or something. Islam is not to blame here, and it is stupid to penalize all burka-wearers for the transgressions of a few wackos.
Ah, so there will be sweat shops in your Brave New Middle East, eh?
Is this serious or not? If not, it’s in very bad taste, and if it is serious you are in need of help this board cannot provide you with.
Back to what? Hating the US? Practicing Islam?
This is the Pit. Ad hominin attacks are allowed within limits.
See above. Recap: By fairly prosecuting terrorists and working to alleviate the conditions that lead to such fanaticism.
That is as accurate a portrayal of the views of most terrorists as I could imagine. The door swings both ways, pal.
Straw man yet again. No one that I have seen has advocated the terrorists running rough-shod over Israel. What they have been advocating is an approach that avoids genocide and the death of innocents as much as possible.
Stop arguing against things that nobody said!
I’m not sure what you’re saying here. Everyone should have the right to what? What country are you talking about? How does the racial/ethnic makeup of that country relate to the Israel-Palestine conflict?
The problem is that the methods you advocate would almost certainly result in genocide, whether planned or not.
So it is acceptable to murder the defenseless and innocent in a wartime situation? Come now.
It’s not necessary. In fact, it would only result in more people dying.
I really hope you’re joking here.
He, here, is referring to bin Laden. Who has little or no connection to the Palestinian goal of getting their own country (and in some cases, driving Israel into the sea). Drop the burka thing. It’s irrevelent to the discussion at hand.
But the point is that doing this will, at best, decimate the Palestinian population, and at worst destroy them entirely. And they might just take Israel down with them, depending on how long the escalation matters. A solution doesn’t count if it ends in everyone dying.
Who is they? What country are you referring to? Who is taking over this country? You also seem to be promoting the abolition of “wrong” views (which are views you don’t agree with). If this is untrue, and you are only hoping for a system in which crime is dealt with, then I agree with you. Any tacit support for terrorism in a country should be discouraged; no one is above the law.
Is Saddam even funding victim relief? (If he is, I really doubt it’s on the order of 10k… pesos, maybe.) Also, you are asking for the impossible. It is impossible for a person to become un-related to their family. There is no way the family of a terrorist can stop being the family of a terrorist, and so they are at risk of being stomped on by the Israeli government regardless of their personal views on the situation.
What on earth would the US military be doing hunting down Palestinians in Israel? It’s not our fight, man.
Cite?
I would be more likely to take revenge on the US government for killing people who didn’t do anything wrong.
Just for the record, I have no dog in this fight. My post comes off as pro-Palestine, but mainly because I was correcting someone who is heavily pro-Israel.
Ok, I’ll help you out with that Super_Gnat.
http://www.etaiwannews.com/Perspective/2002/06/22/1024715764.htm
This article discusses the increasing use of women and children as suicide bombers. Issa Badir is one example, he was 16 when he blew up himself and 2 Israelis. It also indicates that Israeli authorities arrested a 12 year old Palestinian boy who they said was planning an attack.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/25/1017004766310.html
This article describes Saddam Hussein’s $25,000 bounty payable to the family of each Palestinian suicide bomber and indicates that his motivation is to provide “an enticement for others to volunteer for martyrdom in the name of the Palestinian people.”
As for the shield comment, IMO it is fair to say that any combatant who hides in the midst of innocent men, women, and children is using those innocents as a shield.
After busting BIG_DADDY’s balls for not providing cites, I would have thought that you would be scrupulous about providing cites for your own wild assertions. Guess I was wrong.
On a more technical issue, the Palestinians may not give a rip about Usama, but he has adopted their cause as one of his own (even if it is only an attempt to advance his real agenda by using the Palestinians as pawns). In a recent letter to the American people attributed to Usama Bin Laden, he answers the question, “Why are we fighting and opposing you?” His very first answer, answer 1(a), is “You attacked us in Palestine.” He may well be opportunistically taking advantage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but technically I would say that he has something to do with it by his own choice.
http://www.crikey.com.au/columnists/2002/11/29/20021129ossie.html
patteeu, thanks for the cites.
When I said “Israelis have killed family members for no reason other than genetic ties”, I meant that only within my little example of what would happen if the Israelis followed a 10x policy. I don’t think they have killed people over that kind of thing; but this and this would seem to suggest that people are being targeted who did nothing wrong.
“He may well be opportunistically taking advantage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but technically I would say that he has something to do with it by his own choice.”
Well, yes, but at the same time I think people can work towards a Israeli-Palestine peace without including bin Laden at all, in the same way that the US could decide on a gay marriage bill without consulting Fred Phelps. For that reason, quoting bin Laden’s stupid demands and equating them with what the Palestinian people want is misinformed, at best.
that should read. “people have been targeted”