Catsailor.com

he said "this attack is way out of proportion"

Posted By: samevans

he said "this attack is way out of proportion" - 09/17/01 09:53 PM

He said the "this attack is way out of proportion".
<br>What does he think would have been IN PROPORTION?
<br>The murder of how many women and children would have been IN PROPORTION?
<br>How many lives destroyed would be IN PROPORTION?
<br>Maybe he feels only one building would have been IN PROPORTION?
<br>Maybe he can tell us, "In proportion to what?"
<br>Some people say what they really feel, even when they are trying to disguise it.
<br>Look up "Freudian Slip".<br><br>
Posted By: Wouter

International court of justice is the a ... - 09/18/01 06:39 AM

Ohh, (deep sighe), do I need to explain everything ?
<br>
<br>International court of justice is a proportional way to ventilate and act upon his frustration and dislike towards the USA. Or the United nations council. Sadly USA never ractified the first and holds a veto in the last. Or several NGO's or democratic lobby groups, all very legal and respectible.
<br>
<br>Am I now the new public enemy nr 1 of the US for using the word proportional Chris ? Use your god given mind a little every now and then.
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

Attached File
2581-  (17 downloads)
Posted By: Luiz

Re: he said "this attack is way out of proportion" - 09/18/01 02:12 PM

When the majority in a democratic nation claims (votes) for war, the reaction we see is certainly "in proportion" with the people's wish - America's leaders are acting as expected in a democracy.
<br>
<br>The problem is that (quoting someone I don't remember) there is nothing to prevent a zillion people to be wrong and one sole individual to be right. It happens more frequently then we would like to admit. We all have seen races when all the fleet moves to one side and one lucky guy wins going to other side...
<br>
<br>I agree with Wouter. This response appears to be excessive and, although democratic, could lead to more violence. I certainly expect that as the initial anger (wich is Sam's and the mojority's understandable reaction) converts to introspection, a more mature response to terrorism is found.
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>Luiz
Posted By: Jake

Re: he said "this attack is way out of proportion" - 09/18/01 06:55 PM

At some point we've got to quit calling this a terrorist attack but as the true act of war it was. The difference? Terrorist make demands; requests to let "so and so out of jail or else", or "get out of our business or else", etc. There are no demands. This was a direct attempt to damage the US and the free trade world (why attack the "World Trade Center"). Who knows - it may very well only be the first phase in attempt to destroy the US. Clearly, they have underestimated what it will take to accomplish either of these.
<br>
<br>We have an obligation to protect ourselves from future events of this nature from these people. Clearly, they will not resist such acts out of concern for our innocent lives. We we have no choice but to compel them, and their supporters, to resist such future acts but through concern for their own lives.
<br>
<br>This was not terrorism and it's not a bar fight. This was the death of several, several, several, thousand completely innocent people.<br><br>[color:blue][b]Jake
<br>[color:blue][b]Nacra 5.2 (2112)
<br>[color:blue][b]Hobie 18 (???)

Attached File
2598-  (17 downloads)
Posted By: Jake

Re: he said "this attack is way out of proportion" - 09/18/01 08:12 PM

More thoughts on this - I guess I'm not quite finished: I have thought long and hard about this in the last few days and have never been one to strongly support war and shedding of blood or violence of any kind. Heck, I can't even stand to watch the 'Funniest American Videos' because they consistently show people that were probably injured and laugh at it. I realize that this is not a decision to be taken lightly. I am angry like the rest of the world but I realize that recommending this kind of reaction is a VERY serious thing to do. I wish there was another way and would really like to hear how you guys would propose we prevent something like this happening somewhere else in the world. Talk isn't going to cut it with these guys and sanctions would take forever and only irritate them more. These extremist have plenty of money (thanks in part to Bin Laden's short selling of the reinsurance companies stocks that backed the World Trade Center just before and after the destruction) and they don't subscribe to anything you or I would consider "reason". Our country is all about criticism and I'm not angry at the suggestion that we shouldn't strike back. So criticize if you wish, but let us know: what else would you suggest?<br><br>[color:blue][b]Jake
<br>[color:blue][b]Nacra 5.2 (2112)
<br>[color:blue][b]Hobie 18 (???)

Attached File
2600-  (17 downloads)
Posted By: ScaredyCat

Give it a try yourself - 09/19/01 12:44 AM

Wouter,
<br>
<br>Perhaps you ought to try yourself to "use your god given mind a little every now and then."
<br>
<br>The day the United States relies on the court of world opinion or the UN to vote on how we should resolve an attack on our nation will be one hell of a sad day for this great country.
<br>
<br>ScaredyCat<br><br>

Attached File
2616-  (15 downloads)
Posted By: Jake

Re: Give it a try yourself - 09/19/01 01:07 AM

I'm not sure but I think Wouter was actually saying that those that initiated the attacks on U.S. soil would have been more justified to use the international court of justice to file complaints against the U.S. - not that the U.S should have post attack.
<br>
<br>Wouter?
<br>
<br>(However, I would imagine that those that the parties involved have grievances against more than just the U.S. and would put no faith in such a system.)
<br><br><br>[color:blue][b]Jake
<br>[color:blue][b]Nacra 5.2 (2112)
<br>[color:blue][b]Hobie 18 (???)

Attached File
2617-  (15 downloads)
Posted By: ScaredyCat

Re: Give it a try yourself - 09/19/01 01:19 AM

I was referring to Wouter's second post when he said, "...sadly USA never ratified the first and holds a veto on the last"
<br>
<br>Thank God we haven't ratified and Thank God we have veto power. The US is a sovereign nation that should NEVER give over to a "world forum" to consider it's security requirements.
<br>
<br>I won't even go into the obscenity of what his first post implied.
<br>
<br>ScaredyCat
<br>
<br>This is from CNN news tonight:
<br>
<br>"...The meeting of about 600 delegates originally had been expected to begin Tuesday but has been postponed as many clerics had not yet arrived by early afternoon, Taliban officials said. Officials said the meeting will get under way as soon as possible..."
<br>
<br>I'm hoping that our government realizes the unbelievable military blunder of the Taliban leaders to assemble in one place at one time...and of what consequences it could have for that group of 600 terrorists. If we are serious about striking at terrorism, a more perfect opportunity to strike may never exist again.
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>

Attached File
2618-  (17 downloads)
Posted By: Jake

Re: Give it a try yourself - 09/19/01 02:31 AM

ok - not very tasty. Definitely not a good time to exasperate disagreement with US policy. However, I'll give the guy one last word of doubt (never met him BTW):
<br>
<br>CERTAINLY Wouter didn't mean to imply that any physical attack would have been "in proportion".
<br><br><br>[color:blue][b]Jake
<br>[color:blue][b]Nacra 5.2 (2112)
<br>[color:blue][b]Hobie 18 (???)

Attached File
2619-  (13 downloads)
Posted By: Wouter

Indeed Jake, ... - 09/19/01 07:03 AM

The hijackers in the planes will not have used these systems but their support base of neglected Palestinians, Kurts and other group that are now productive recruting groups would have a letout for their needs and thus the terrorist support base would be alot smaller. Lets face it, these people feel neglected and mistreated by the western world, this is a given situation, we can not change it afterwards. Only adresse this and give these people renewed hope and a feeling theat their opinions are heard and taking into consideration will be the final solution to arab terrorism. And I'm not taking about the people in the terrorist camps but the larger people in the refugee camps who has almost nothing and are waiting for many many years for an improvement. The last is the power base of the fanatica terrorists. Attack, ohh sorry, adres this ! I must say that the new US pressure on Arafat and Sharon is a good first step. This conflict must be solved or a new attack in the future must be expected. Afganistan, people first priority there is food and shelter, opposition to Taliban is not on their minds for the first points are more pressing. Improve on this and peope will demand freedom and eventually move to oppose autocratic governments. Compare this to the Maslov theory. And compare this to the PLO, the quiet time started when this organisation was taken seriously and now Arafat is acting more like a responsible statesmans than a terrorist group leader he was many years back,
<br>
<br>Yes I know this is hard to swallow, and easiest way would be to stand firm and kill as many "terrorist" as possible but Israel did this and it has proven not to work. So the question now is :"Do we want satisfaction or results ?"
<br>
<br>We call ourselfs the civilized world and place ourselfs on a higher moral ground, this implies a balanced approach with tough choices. Sadly we can't decide who we negociated with, even though we want too, it is the people on the other side who do. This is something we have to accept.
<br>
<br>Wouter
<br><br><br>

Attached File
2621-  (18 downloads)
Posted By: Wouter

Jake - 09/19/01 07:16 AM

I realized that before I started that this would not be well welcomed but isn't it the responsibility of democratic forces to make sure that things are discussed and viewed from different sides. That is why I choose the to give a little opposition. It would truelly cowardous to remain silent.
<br>
<br>And the following quote is the reason why.
<br>
<br>ScaredyCat
<br>
<br>This is from CNN news tonight:
<br>
<br>"...The meeting of about 600 delegates originally had been expected to begin Tuesday but has been postponed as many clerics had not yet arrived by early afternoon, Taliban officials said. Officials said the meeting will get under way as soon as possible..."
<br>
<br>I'm hoping that our government realizes the unbelievable military blunder of the Taliban leaders to assemble in one place at one time...and of what consequences it could have for that group of 600 terrorists. If we are serious about striking at terrorism, a more perfect opportunity to strike may never exist again.
<br>
<br>(Unquote)
<br>
<br>
<br>Okay guys, what do you think to gain from this ? 600 islamic clergymen, Wouldn't killing them rally the whole islamic world to the side of Osama Bin Laden and other groups ? Even the large moderate islamic group would be swayed to these groups and flight traffic would be impossible for next couple of years. But you got you vengence right ! How smart is this ?
<br>
<br>Wouter
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>

Attached File
2623-  (17 downloads)
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Jake - 09/19/01 11:15 AM

Sorry Guys!
<br>
<br>I have to agree with Wouter on this one!
<br>
<br>mark<br><br>
Posted By: samevans

Re: your simple-minded ignorance - 09/19/01 04:36 PM

You people just don't get it.
<br>No one has explained what we did that provoked these atttacks!
<br>No one has explained what we did that we could theoretically be sued for!
<br>No one has explained who has a legal or moral right to attack us!
<br>We have been told that it is OUR responsibility for refugee camps all over the world. Since when?
<br>It's amazing how anti-U.S. weasels critisize us for years, but then expect us to fix other countries problems.
<br>People hate us for sending money to their enemies, even if we send money to them.
<br>We sent money and Stinger missles to the Afgans to defeat the Russians. We helped these people gain their freedom and now they have decided that we are their enemy. And some morons think that by helping their refugees, they will be our friends!!!! Get a clue!!!
<br>Israel traded "land for peace" and got no peace.
<br>All members of the Taliban are terrorists. Just because some are Islamic leaders DOES NOT exempt them from responsibility.
<br>Pakistan is an Islamic country and they have quickly jumped in on our side to help capture Bin Laden.
<br>So save the crap about "all Islamic countries".
<br>
<br>YOU PEOPLE JUST DON'T GET IT.
<br>THESE ARE FANATICS.
<br>THEY HAVE DECLARED A "HOLY" WAR AGAINST US.
<br>THEY DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHO WE HELP.
<br>WE ARE THE GREAT SATAN.
<br>THEY ARE MAD DOGS WHO CAN'T BE REASONED WITH.
<br>THE REST OF THE WORLD, ESPECIALLY THE ISLAMIC WORLD, IS FINALLY REALIZING THIS.
<br>WE NEED TO MAKE THEM THE MOST HATED PEOPLE IN THE WORLD BY NEUTRALIZING ANYONE WHO HELPS THEM.<br><br>
Posted By: Wouter

Okay (nm) - 09/19/01 07:46 PM

Like I said No (further) Message.
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

Attached File
2641-  (18 downloads)
Posted By: ScaredyCat

Right! - 09/19/01 08:47 PM

OK,
<br>
<br>An intruder sneaks into your home at night. He slits the throat of your children. He lights fire to your house. As he steps from your house you hear "I'll be back." You can watch him walk away and live in fear for the day he will most surely return or you can shoot him now and avoid years of suffering.
<br>
<br>An intruder HAS slipped into our house. I for one don't intend on letting the tracks get cold before hunting him down, including those who would give him safe harbor.
<br>
<br>To retaliate against a country whose government aids and abets terrorists is not vengeance. It is not bloodlust. It is not murder. It is self-defense. They do not want to live: we do. Let's remove their threat so promptly and so decisively that no one will think of making it again--and then get on with our lives.
<br>
<br>We are at war, and we must respond accordingly, causing maximum damage as quickly as possible with minimum risk to and loss of American lives. We must deliver an ultimatum to Iran, Iraq, Syria, the Sudan, Libya and Afghanistan: within seven days, disarm your military, destroy all terrorist
<br>camps within your borders, and allow constant inspections henceforth to guarantee that you do not again become a threat to American citizens. If these countries fail to comply--which is extremely likely, given America's record of vacillation and weakness in the face of decades of terrorist attacks--we must unhesitatingly bomb the terrorist camps to rubble, AND raze the capitals of the countries in question, starting with Afghanistan. Blow them out of the 21st century and back to the period that had no respect for
<br>life, liberty and property: the Dark Ages.
<br>
<br>What about the "innocent citizens" in those countries? Many danced in the streets with delight at the news that thousands of American civilians had been burned and crushed to death. If there are any true innocents among them, let them take those seven days to flee the capital and the country, or to rebel.
<br>
<br>Wouter, America has been called on throughout history to do the "dirty work" for the world. We will rise to the occassion again and bring forth a world in which our and your family can live and thrive in safety.
<br>
<br>You're ignorance about the dictators that are the "taliban" I find disturbing for any western thinker. We are dealing with common street thugs here, not "clerics." Currently being held by the "taliban" are a group of foreign aid workers, being held over for "trial" for the mere possession of bibles. If found guilty, they will surely be put to death.
<br>
<br>"clerics" my butt.
<br>
<br>ScaredyCat
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>

Attached File
2642-  (17 downloads)
Posted By: ScaredyCat

The Last Word - 09/19/01 09:18 PM

Wouter,
<br>
<br>I'm thinking perhaps since you don't live in the US that you don't fully understand the philosophical underpinnings of our society. I'd like to close my end of this discussion with a few quotes from a couple of web-sites I visited recently that may help.
<br>
<br>Although I feel very strongly that you are dead wrong in your assessment of the means that should be taken to drive terrorism from the world, I assume that we would both have that as a mutual goal, so I respect your point of view, as flawed as I think it's basis is.
<br>
<br>**********
<br>"As the gruesome bombings of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon demonstrate—and before that, of the USS Cole, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S. soldiers in Saudi Arabia, the World Trade Center, Pam Am flight 103—America is at war.
<br>
<br>To understand America's depressingly feeble response to those warring against it, one must understand the fundamental ideas, the philosophic ideas, shaping our leaders' foreign policy. And to understand why America is the hated target of Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, the PLO, Syria, Libya and the hordes of terrorists they finance and harbor, one must understand the philosophic ideas motivating these regimes.
<br>
<br>What ideas have undercut America? Politically, America's policy is one of appeasement, which emboldens our enemies. We occasionally half-heartedly bomb individual terrorists, but we negotiate with and leave unharmed the countries that perpetrate the attacks. Our leaders have been taught in college that pragmatism—the abandonment of a principled stand—is practical. Morally, America has been disarmed by altruism, the idea that sacrifice for the sake of others is the moral ideal. Our leaders think it is wrong to defend, by whatever force is necessary, America's self-interest. And the moral relativism and egalitarianism flowing from our universities causes our leaders to identify our enemies simply as men who have different but equally valid values. Our enemies are not seen as the evil they are.
<br>
<br>Those warring against us are not isolated madmen but people motivated by irrational philosophical ideas. The religious mysticism and supernaturalism of Islam teaches them that the human mind is an impotent nothing that must prostrate itself before Allah, that the individual must sacrifice himself to the supernatural (the suicide bombers believe their self-sacrifice is the ticket to a blessed afterlife). Accordingly, these people hate those who champion not Allah but this earth—not mysticism but science and technology—not faith but reason—not collectivism and obedience to authority but individualism and freedom. In short, they hate and want to destroy the core values of Western Civilization—and its greatest flowering, the United States of America. It is no accident that they targeted the two tallest buildings in New York's skyline, concrete symbols of America's achievements."
<br>**********
<br>Ford Hall Forum, 1972: "A Nation's Unity"
<br>
<br>Q: What should be done about the killing of innocent people in war?
<br>
<br>Answer: This is a major reason people should be concerned about the nature of their government. Certainly, the majority in any country at war is innocent. But if by neglect, ignorance, or helplessness, they couldn't overthrow their bad government and establish a better one, then they must pay the price for the sins of their government-as we are all paying for the sins of ours. [In this sense] there are no innocent people in war. If some people put up with dictatorship-as some of them do in Soviet Russia, and some of them did in Nazi Germany-then they deserve what their government deserves.
<br> Our only concern should be: who started that war? If you can establish that a given country did it, then there is no need to consider the rights of that country, because it has initiated the use of force, and therefore stepped outside the principle of right.
<br>***********
<br>
<br>I did also want to comment on your notion that retaliation has not helped Israel. It is quite clear that without the use of retaliation, Israel would not exist as a State today.
<br>
<br>**********
<br>
<br>ScaredyCat
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>

Attached File
2643-  (13 downloads)
Posted By: Anonymous

Splitting the difference - 09/20/01 03:02 AM

Wouter,
<br> You make the point that the support of the terrorists are the downtrodden and hungry people. If you think simply providing food and resources will remove their support for the terrorists, you're making as much of an oversimplification as those who want to turn the Middle East into a glass factory.
<br> I'd like to point out what happened in the UN relief efforts in Sudan. Bin Laden wasn't too happy with the food being delivered and killed some 19 Americans then too. I don't think giving them food made much difference. I respect your point and agree that the response to this latest criminal act is to both starve the power base and to cut off the head of the current threat. This evil is a Hydra and demands a multifaceted counter. Bin Laden and his co-conspirators must be brought to justice without making him a martyr and furthering the cycle.
<br> Tom Clancy introduced an interesting idea- an Islamic trial with televised Islamic justice (execution by sword) being carried out. (Okay, fiction and reality are not the same, but did any of us expect such terrorism could be anything other than fiction?) My question is if such a trial can be done in an unbiased fashion and can it be done to satisfy the demands of both justice and silencing the opinion of his support base? Saudi Arabia and Egypt are out if only due to Bin Laden's politics. What if Yasser Arafat could be encouraged to convene a council of clerics from each of the Arab nations that would be able to serve justice fairly? The real challenge would then be to develop adequate evidence suitable for an Islamic court... I don't know if that's a possibility since I know little of the legal structure... <br><br>
Posted By: Jake

Re: Jake - 09/20/01 02:03 PM

ok guys - let's face it. The U.S. is not going to go into Afghanistan with guns blazing and shooting anything that moves. That's not what this situation warrants and not what we are going to do. Yes - some Americans would prefer this method but I'm sure that if they understood the nature of Afghanistan and it's people this wouldn't make sense. Generally the people in Afghanistan are only satisfied with the Taliban government because they can now walk accross the street and not be shot. The majority doesn't even like Bin Laden and don't even know where he is. They don't even like the fact that the Taliban harbors people like that. Perhaps the following is an oversimplification but there is some bad blood against the US because the feeling was that the US 'partnered' with Afghanistan when Russia was pounding them. They thought we would stick with them once their war was over but we dropped them like a rock once Russia gave up. They then fell into a nasty civil war until the Taliban came about and produced something resembling structured government and relative peace with which they've been satisfied for now - these people are tattered by years of war and probably don't have much fight left to overturn a ruthless government.
<br>
<br>We have to remember that even though we have freedom of speech, our news reporting is still open to bias. I saw a clip showing a bunch of Arab people dancing in the street in response to the attack with no more information than "Afghanistan". For all we know, that was one of the Terrorist camps. Imagine if somebody bombed the heck out of Israel (I am NOT suggesting this) - would the camera crews be able to find a group of dancing people in the US? Sure they would. That, in NO way, would express the feelings of this entire country.
<br>
<br>The U.S. IS going into Afghanistan. We ARE going to put craters in the ground in search of justice and future protection. I strongly support this as do almost all of America. I guarantee you that it's going to be limited to the terrorist organizations that have played a part, past or present, in terrorist activities and that our "war" also entails massively increasing our intelligence effort and shadow lurking in middle eastern politics (like it or not). Afghanistan in general will not be a target - give us some credit. It's pretty simple that when we go for targets, anybody that shoots back is next. If all of Afghanistan is shooting back - that's when it gets ugly.
<br>
<br>Been good debating with you guys - Unfortunatly I'll be in my truck on the way to the 'round the island regatta in Ft. Walton Beach, FL. Stay safe.
<br>
<br><br><br>[color:blue][b]Jake
<br>[color:blue][b]Nacra 5.2 (2112)
<br>[color:blue][b]Hobie 18 (???)

Attached File
2653-  (16 downloads)
Posted By: Luiz

There is no last word. - 09/20/01 02:39 PM

Excellent quote, I will repeat it:
<br>
<br>***********
<br>I did also want to comment on your notion that retaliation has not helped Israel. It is quite clear that without the use of retaliation, Israel would not exist as a State today.
<br>**********
<br>
<br>This is especially true when the PLO declared (constitutional!) objectives remain the destruction of Israel and the murder of all jews. That is Hitler reborn, but in the 21st century. This is the kind of enemy that the US is going to fight now.
<br>
<br>When they attack America as well, it is hardly a surprise that the US reacts exactly as in the past - war.
<br>
<br>But today is not the early 20th century. The weapons, communications, economy, information (inteligence) and many other things evolved tremendously. It would be good if the use of war as a solution evolved tremendously as well.
<br>
<br>Making the war as focused and localized as possible and aiming precise targets help. But making the war unnecessary would be even better.
<br>
<br>I would also like to point some other facts about terrorists that need to be taken into carefull consideration:
<br>
<br>1) Terrorists are not a country with a defined geographical location - they are normally hiding in the middle of inocent people. When they think they may be bombed, they try to be near hospitals, mosques, etc. so that even a small deviation can cause their enemys the biggest possible problem explaining it.
<br>
<br>2) Terrorists do not have any commitment with war conventions and treatys, so they do torture people and do use weapons that neither the US or Israel could use (without the government being replaced immediately)
<br>
<br>3) Killing terrorists during a war is unlikely. Israel probably killed more terrorists targeting specific individuals with comando like missions then during wars.
<br>
<br>4)Targeting individuals requires a skilled inteligence service.
<br>
<br>My conclusion:
<br>
<br>The best "war" against terrorism is an inteligence war followed by punctual actions.
<br>
<br>Although a war is (at this point) clearly what the people of America wants, moving troops is too expensive, too visible, too vulnerable and useless against terrorists.
<br>
<br>Just my point of view.
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>Luiz
Posted By: Clayton

Re: There is no last word. - 09/21/01 12:01 AM

I agree with Luiz, just bombing Afghanistan because it seems like the best thing to do right now will just piss off more middle eastern people who may just be like us and would like to see those terrorists get blown away. If we bomb those people we'll be like the terrorists that we are trying to get. This should be a concise effort and with the technology available I don't see why not.
<br>
<br>I'm as mad as the next guy, but the one thing we have to remember is "he who angers you controls you". I would rather have control of myself therefore my anger is contained.
<br>
<br>Flame on if you wish.
<br>
<br>Clayton
<br>American and proud of it.<br><br>
Posted By: ScaredyCat

Differing Points of View - 09/21/01 02:29 AM

Because several of the posters to this thread have had a different point of view on what the best reaction to the invasion of America should be, doesn't mean we don't share the most important value: the love and appreciatiion of and for human life.
<br>
<br>We may disagree on what is the best course of action to insure that the best among us survive and the worst do not, but we do at least agree, I think, that we'd rather be sailing, pursuing life, liberty and happiness, than having to deal with the evil in the world.
<br>
<br>I thought this gave a very good mini-history of the mistakes made by America in the past and gives hope that we can break free from our mistakes and be strive to be on the side of right in the future (it's a bit lengthy, but give it a go):
<br>
<br>http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/itistimetodeclarewar.shtml
<br>
<br>See you at Round the Island!
<br>
<br><br><br>

Attached File
2666-  (12 downloads)
Posted By: tami

Re: Differing Points of View - 09/21/01 02:25 PM

Scaredy-Cat,
<br>you're an OBJECTIVIST?!
<br>
<br>I'll be damned!
<br>
<br>We gotta talk at next Slip to Ship...
<br>sea ya
<br>tami
<br><br><br>

Attached File
2674-  (16 downloads)
Posted By: Cary Palmer

Re: your simple-minded ignorance - 09/24/01 01:02 PM

Muhammed Ali said it best. These people are not ISLAMIC, they're just using that for a cover. Probably just an easy way to recruit in Afghanistan. They're just warped murderers, who have no conscience about killing. Supposedly it is an honor to die for their beliefs. I think we should honor them ALL in this fashion, the sooner the better.
<br>Seems they don't have any qualms about killing innocents, who do you think will be next? I've been of the opinion that there's more to come, they aren't finished, they aren't running and they aren't scared. These people are more than dangerous to us, they could destroy the whole of civilization if left unchecked.
<br>Cleasing the planet of them won't only protect us but the next group of people they decide are their enemies. And the ones after that, and then when there's nobody left but them, I bet they'd be killing each other until there was only one King of the mountain left.
<br>
<br><br><br>Hobie 17
<br>"MISTER LUCKY"

Attached File
2711-  (13 downloads)
© 2024 Catsailor.com Forums