Tim Blair

Nice one.

raisins and virgins for everyone!!

SHARON to RANTISI: "You're fired!"

Next please...

They did the MONSTER mash...

Wonder if his last words were "Oh, I've wasted my life..."

What a waste of a perfectly good car!

Any word from the Palestinians yet as to when these "Gates of Hell" are supposed to be opening?

I assume the Israelis have some Palestinian help in all this; fellows with a bad attitude, as they say in corporations.

"Wonder if his last words were "Oh, I've wasted my life..."

Nope. The last thing to go through his mind was his asshole.

It ain't over yet......but things are looking up. Yes, they are!

Here, in order, is text that appeared under "Breaking News" on CNN (Erakat is the chief Palestinian negotiator):

Erakat: "Retaliation is not the answer"

Erakat: "Revenge is not the way"

Hamas vows revenge over killing of Rantisi

Time for you to delete a couple of choices from your poll, there, Tim :-)

And the familiar cry is heard in Gaza City: "Car swarm! Bring the Glad Bags!"

Re: Ron Hardin

IDF have known his whereabout for a long time. He was always surrounded by civilian human shield. This is probably the first time IDF got an opportunity, and a clear shot at him.

Ok, who won the death pool?

LMAO! you crack me up Tim.

First Yassin, now Rantisi...

Well that tears it. Before the Palestianians wanted to live in peace with their Jewish bretheren of course, but now it's DEATH TO ISRAEL, I'm sure.

Erakat: "Retaliation is not the answer"

Erakat: "Revenge is not the way"

Hamas vows revenge over killing of Rantisi

Let me get this straight -- the left wingers support the Palestinians?

I can see why! They think the same.

looks like Ranteasy opened up the 'gates of hell' as he promised after Yassins wheely explosive death a few weeks ago, and drove straight through those gates and into hell today.

Is it too early to nominate him for a special posthumous Nobel Peace Prize?

Damn...
I voted for the nobel peace prize (you know those stupid nobel people). So who guessed right?

Hey your right PW I could still be in with a chance!
However I'm voting for one of the missiles in the next "leader of hamas" survey.

He said that if he had a choice between heart attack and Apache he would choose Apache. The Israelis aim to please and rarely miss.

Richard said:
"Any word from the Palestinians yet as to when these "Gates of Hell" are supposed to be opening"

They opened to let Yassin in and again for Rantisi

Ok, but what was the winner choice?

I voted for the Snurb T-104 Hell Brick, on the theory that Arrafat already has a Nobel Peace Prize.

Which brings up a question: what is the philosophical conflict in giving Arrafat a Nobel Peace Prize and a missile?

Answer: None!

The good doctor lobbied for Yassin's job and got it. Who's dying to replace Rantisi?

dorkafork and JeffS: Hamas are not representative of all Palestinians. Erekat is a spokesperson for the PA, who are also not representative of all Palestinians. Like any other group in the world, Palestinians are not monolithic. Thus the statements are no more conflicting than the competing policies of Labor and the Liberals.

And JeffS, the left are usually on the side of the Palestinians because they are on the losing side of the power equation. Also, their claims are more legitimate than Israel's.

Also, their claims are more legitimate than Israel's.

Keep working on your act, fatfingers.

"Hamas are not representative of all Palestinians"

Exactly right! This is why the Israeli IDF should be applauded for their surgical extraction of the mad dog element.

A few more years of this, and the Palistinians left over will be worthy neighbours.

fatfingers:

"And JeffS, the left are usually on the side of the Palestinians because they are on the losing side of the power equation. Also, their claims are more legitimate than Israel's."

So you explain your pre-occupation this way? Are you always with the underdog? Does that mean the reasons that caused the Palestinians to be on the "losing side of the power equation" matters not at all?

If so, why do you go on say "Also, their claims are more legitimate than Israel's"? That means the reasons do matter.

If you are going to emulate John Kerry with flip flops, could you at least put contradictory sentences into different paragraphs for indexing purposes?

And regarding "Like any other group in the world, Palestinians are not monolithic". No kidding! But the fact is, Hamas and the PA represent a large percentage of the Palestinians. And the PA is the official Palestinian government. If Erakat actually said what he said, as a PA spokesman, then don't you think the PA might not be the poor mistreated little Arabs that you think they are?!?!?!?

If the White House Press Secretary (I forget his name) made a statement like "We are outraged by the murders and multilations of Coalition soldiers and employees, and there will be revenge!", you and the rest of the moonbats would be all over that like flies on shit.

No, in your bizarre little universe, the PA is part of the "underdog", and don't have to be nice and loving. Allah Ahkbar!! is fine by you.

Take your hypocrisy somewhere else. You are a useless idiot. Karl Marx would hang his head in shame to see his ideological children being so stupid.

Can someone with a better medium-term memory than me remind me - for all the Hamas threats of "revenge" and ever-so-sincere Western worrying about "derailing the peace process", has there been a single successful suicide bombing in the month or so since Yassin got whacked?

the left are usually on the side of the Palestinians because they are on the losing side of the power equation.

And therein lies the reason people do not take the left, or fatfignres, seriously.

"We will all die one day. Nothing will change. If by Apache or by cardiac arrest, I prefer Apache," he said.

How.

This is obscene.

Panties all up in a bundle often, Miranda?

Miranda Divide,

Obscenity is a matter of knowing it when you SEE it. Doubt very seriously that you've seen firsthand the obscene corruption of the PA- Arafat and family are obscenely rich, rich, rich. Doubt you've eyeballed the obscene carnage of the Intifada "matyr" bombers and victims- body parts strewn everywhere because why??? Doubt you've witnessed the obscene brainwashing of children and teenagers by Hamas et al to kill themselves and Israeli innocents for a cause that older Palestinians are not as eager to suicide over.

Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder. Have you beheld the pornography of extolling mass murder for the favor of Allah?

this is excellent!

Quentin George: Do you ever have anything to say?

JeffS: Congratulations, you are only the third person to ever engage in genuine debate with me here. Although I recommend you scale down the multiple exclamation and question marks.

I wouldn't say I'm preoccupied with the issue (unlike some), and I'm not explaining myself here, just clearing up your misconceptions of the left.

Yes, you are right, Hamas and the PA represent a large portion of Palestinians (it's just most on this forum have no idea). The PA is the official government, but in reality they have little power - they couldn't even hold elections because of the Israelis. Let me also say that I think the PA is corrupt and useless and an obstacle to peace and productive development in the Middle East. It should be abolished.

Careful, JeffS. It wasn't the White House press secretary who vowed revenge, just Brigadier General Zimmit! Moonbats indeed.

Before you read too much into my posts, let me assure you that just because someone is the underdog means that they are in the right. What it does do is transfer some of the responsibility for resolution. If a 10-year-old and a 20-year-old get into a fight, who do you think has the power and therefore responsibility to resolve it peacefully? And it's more accurately depicted "Allah'u akbar", FYI. Which I don't agree with, not being Muslim. In fact, I'm lazily agnostic.

You have failed to demonstrate hypocrisy on my part, or that my ideology is Marxist, or that I am stupid. Calling me such just confirms your own stupidity.

Sortelli: How do you know who takes me seriously? I could be Bin Laden or Bush for all you know.

Whoops! I should proof-read my scribblings before posting. Sixth paragraph, first sentence should read:

"..let me assure you that just because someone is the underdog DOES NOT mean that they are in the right"

I don't want to be accused of hypocrisy stupidity because of my fat fingers. :-)

Well, actually, fatfingers, you demonstrate your own hypocrisy and stupidity:

"Careful, JeffS. It wasn't the White House press secretary who vowed revenge, just Brigadier General Zimmit! Moonbats indeed"

There was not one word in your last post about Erakat or the PA's call for revenge. Instead, you gleefully point to a general officer on the front. Just how is it that you can accuse at one side (Zimmit), but not the other for the same act (Erakat)?

That's hypocrisy. Out of your own fat fingers. Stupidity because you don't recognize it.

Oh, and by the way......please provide a link to the comments by "Brigadier General Zimmit". I did a Google search, and hit nothing. Are you just making this up to bolster your ego? Or did your fat fingers make yet another mistake?

I dunno fatfigners, how can anyone take you seriously when you can't even be convinced that Al Qaeda was responsible for 9-11?

I can't claim to know what you think or believe on the other side of your stubby digits. What you say and the points you choose to make are all I have to go by. And they make you look like a leftist nutjob.

Zimmit probably is "Kimmit"

You know, Z and K are on the opposite sides of most keyboards.

JeffS: I may need a spell-checker, but you need a dictionary. I am not being hypocritical! Remember, YOU brought up the false claim that "If the White House Press Secretary ... made a statement like "We are outraged by the murders and multilations of coalition soldiers and employees, and there will be revenge!", you and the rest of the moonbats would be all over that like flies on shit." I was showing you that such a statement HAD been made (though not by the WHPS), and not one lefty fly (not even me) had landed on it. I was not condemning the call for revenge, so in not condemning other calls for revenge, I am being consistent, not hypocritical! You must be getting more stupid.

Sortelli: I am mostly convinced that al-Qaeda was responsible, largely from a lack of other suspects. But I cannot take seriously anyone who believes that al-Qaeda are responsible simply because they have a lot ideologically invested in that conclusion.

You are all reading too much into my posts. If I take one lefty position, you all extrapolate other positions I have definitely NOT taken, and blast me on them. Read what you see, not what you think you see.

Can someone with a better medium-term memory than me remind me - for all the Hamas threats of "revenge" and ever-so-sincere Western worrying about "derailing the peace process", has there been a single successful suicide bombing in the month or so since Yassin got whacked?

There was just a bombing at the Erez crossing that killed a border policeman, as well as some sniper killings. But, on the whole, you're right -- the most striking outcome was how little fallout there was.

I just asked in the other thread if you were stupid or if you were a liar because you actually claim, with a straight face, that Peter Singer does not believe humans and animals are equal.

I'm going to have to add a third option, I guess. Are you stupid, are you a liar, or are you so unreasonably contrarian that the only points you can make in an argument are ones that render logic into uselessness?

I have no proof that you even exist and we can't operate on that assumption just because we have a lot idealogically invested in the idea that there is a physical world populated by other human beings, so we should probably start ignoring you until you provide some proof that you're not really some grotesque shadow on a cave wall.

That was to figners, of course, not Otter.

HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! [wipes tears from eyes]

Nice try, fatfingers, but no cigar! Here's the definition from www.dictionary.com:

hy·poc·ri·sy: The act or practice of a hypocrite; a feigning to be what one is not, or to feel what one does not feel; a dissimulation, or a concealment of one's real character, disposition, or motives; especially, the assuming of false appearance of virtue or religion; a simulation of goodness.

1: an expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction [syn: lip service] 2: insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have

True, I laid a trap.....and you walked right into it.

My original statement was:

.... If Erakat actually said what he said, as a PA spokesman, then don't you think the PA might not be the poor mistreated little Arabs that you think they are?!?!?!?

If the White House Press Secretary (I forget his name) made a statement like "We are outraged by the murders and multilations of Coalition soldiers and employees, and there will be revenge!", you and the rest of the moonbats would be all over that like flies on shit.

If you were not a hypocrite (in the classical sense, not the liberal definition), you would have treated comments by Erakat and this mythical general (still no link to that quote!) equally. Or at least ignored both.

Instead, you proved me right by jumping on the shit like a good little bug. You claim to be on the right side (that of the underdog), but proclaim their virtues as our vices, all the while radiating your own "piety".

Hypocrisy. And stupidity.

And just to keep the facts straight: I don't know that General Whoever did or did not say anything about revenge. It's possible. If so, it's likely that he is no longer in command.

But that's not the point. As far as my beliefs go....I understand the need for revenge. I try to stomp on it, it's not the way we want to go. But if you can kill a bunch of terrorists in open combat, go for it. If they won't surrender, that's too bad.

And as far as my beliefs towards Hamas, PA, et al. It's not that I don't understand their desires. It's that I don't care. I want them to lose, because I see them as the barbarians at the gates.

So I am not a hypocrite. My values are in the open, and I don't claim any virtues.

If in the process I can tell off a useless idiot, that's gravy.

Sortelli:

It's not that I take fatfingers seriously. But other people read this thread, and I don't want them to think that fatfingers has some sort of superkarma that everyone loves to bask in. As you point out, he's a contrarian, arguing for the sake of arguing.

So I just prove that his "superkarma" is acutally the odor of his unwashed body. Must come from living in that cave.

Sortelli: You've got me! I am incurably contrarian to the Xtreme!! Hang on - my agreeing with you has rendered that option null. Have you considered the possibility that I believe in what I'm writing, and that I think you are wrong, based on the facts?

I think the problem is that no-one here is used to someone turning up and taking a different view, and then sticking to their guns. This disturbs you, driving you to ad hominem attacks. Please feel free to continue the insults, they just confirm your lack of real substance. But if my stupidity/wrongness is so overwhelming, you shouldn't have a problem debating properly and winning easily.

Have you considered the possibility that I believe in what I'm writing, and that I think you are wrong, based on the facts?

Let's run over that one:

You attack the idea that we should hold Al Qaeda responsible for 9-11 but you believe yourself that they are. So you don't believe in what you're writing.

You deny that Peter Singer believes animals and humans are fundamentally equal but you know that he does, in fact, believe this. So you can't be basing your arguments on fact.

JeffS: How sad. You seem to have cracked.

Let us recap. I didn't refer to Erekat's call for revenge, because it is irrelevant. You made a false claim re calls for revenge, so I corrected it and moved on. You then called me a hypocrite for accepting one call for revenge and not another, when IN FACT I had neither condemned nor praised EITHER call.

You were wrong that one call hadn't been made, that's ALL I was saying. I have made no claim as to virtues or vices, made no claim about which "side" I was on (a statement of yours that shows what mentality you have - "us" and "them"). I made claims about why the Left TENDS to support Palestinian causes. You then went off into moonbat-land.

No hypocrisy on my part, just stupidity on yours, for all to see.

Sortelli has corrected my dreadful spelling, and found the General and his quote, but you would know that if you actually read things properly.

I am not calling you a hypocrite either. Just woefully wrong.

Bah. The IDF works too fast. I was having a downcount to the one month mark after Sheikh Yassim's timely demise to post a triumphant "so what about those floodgates of hell" on my blog... Now I had to point out this obvious fact a bit early.

It'll be interesting to see if the usual choir will repeat the same dire warnings from last time, those that didn't materialise.

I went to the USA Today story and the banner ad was "Plan your exit strategy"

Quentin George: Do you ever have anything to say?

When I read something from you that actually has a point, rather than meaningless drivel, then, maybe I will add to the conversation.

Until then, its like teaching a pig to sing: A waste of my time, and it annoys the pig.

And we are all calling you an asshole, fatfringey.

As for Miranda: she's just mad 'cos she lost the death pool.

OK, that's enough for this thread. fatfingers is all tuckered out and needs his medication.

Okay folks, the "Fatfingers Show" is off for the night. I've banned his IP since I figure we could all use a break from drooling lunacy. I have also banned animal-molester-approver Xavier. (See his comments to this post to see what I'm talking about. I think we all can agree that the discussion of our favorite perversions should be confined to those involving one's own species.)

its like teaching a pig to sing: A waste of my time, and it annoys the pig

But me and Jeff LIKE to annoy pigs. :)

Thanks, Andrea. Given that fatfingers could only defend his statements by lying or changing the subject, I won't be missing his responses.

Yes, thank you, Andrea. I shouldn't feed this particular troll, but there's something in his smug look and blank eyes that makes me want to kick the whey out of him.

Metaphorically speaking, of course. Sortelli understands, I'm sure.

My question about Yassin was a bit prescient.

YEEEEEEEHAAAA! I would have loved to ride that bomb all the way down.

Do little old Palistinian ladies have charming collections of dessicated human flesh from hamas matyres on their mantle pieces like our western ones do porclean kittens and collectors plates?

"This one is a scrap of shin-bone fom Rantisi, and this I believe is an ear from that nice young Mohommed that used to live next door... you remember him, blank expression, used to yell alot? His mother's got the other one I think. Praise Allah!"

Sortelli:

I bow to you as my master. You said:

Zimmit probably is "Kimmit"

You know, Z and K are on the opposite sides of most keyboards.

I did a Google, and found a lot of references to "Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt". He is the Coalition Provisional Authority Deputy Director For Coalition Operations, some sort of assistant G3 if you speak that language. The web site is http://www.cpa-iraq.org/; he gives press briefings as well, and his name pops up in a lot of, ummmmmm, alternative news sites.

I haven't found anything that fartfingers alluded to, but there are transcripts of daily briefings going back months. It's a good bet that someone quoted General Kimmitt out of context, and that got twisted during it's transit through Moonbat Central. From my professional experience, General Kimmitt would not keep the job he has if he displayed the attitude fartfingers claimed he did.

So I won't dig into this any further. I don't care to take the time to prove what is probably a negative. fritterfingers ain't worth it.

It's a good thing that the Left didn't lose its collective marbles until long after WWII was safely won. After all, Hitler was "on the wrong side of the power equation" from Stalingrad on.

On the other hand, here at home the taxpayer is on the losing side of the power equation and the lefties seem pretty happy with that.

Just goes to show: the Israelis certainly don't discriminate against the handicapped - the able bodied get exactly the same treatment.

The update shows that Hamas will have a secret leader. That will make Isreal's job of target acquisition more difficult, but I am sure that they are up to the challenge.

Perhaps Hamas counter that with a "rotating leadership", thusly, at a hypothetical Hamas Executive Council Meeting:

"OK, who leads Hamas into glorius battle today?"

"It's Abu's turn."

"What do you mean, it's my turn? I did it Tuesday! No, Khaled's turn."

"Hey, now just wait! I have a dentist appointment. I can't do it today, but tomorrow is fine."

"Well, it's not my turn -- I was the Glorius Leader yesterday."

"OK, how about Ahmed?"

"Ahmed? He's not at this executive meeting, some sort of family problem."

"Yes, exactly! He's not here! He can be the Glorius Leader today! Did I mention, the IDF scrambled several helicopters a few minutes ago?"

[a chorus by the three Hamas executives]

"Oh Ahmed, Our Great and Glorious Leader For Today! Lead Us Into Exalted Battle!"

"Right. Now, who's gonna call Ahmed with the news?"

Andrea: Oohhh, did I cut too close to the bone for you? You poor little thing. Don't you realise banning is a tactical error? It is tantamount to admitting you cannot answer my criticisms.

I have given no reasonable cause to be banned. Your reason is that you want to spare other my supposed lunacy. What rubbish. They don't HAVE to read my posts if they don't want to. Be honest, and say why you really don't want me posting.

And your attempted silencing of me for no reason is (obviously) easily circumvented.

Sortelli: Care to point to one lie or change of subject by me? Or are you just feeling brave enough to say such things because you thought I could no longer reply?

We have to create a new prize for the Hamas leadership.

I propose the Nobel Pieces Prize, awarded to the Hamas leader who blows into the most pieces in the most noble way -- all in honor of Nobel, who invented dynamite for crying out loud!

Jeff:

Well, fatfingers was baiting you for a trap. Your point was that the Bush administration doesn't issue spittle-flecked fatwas calling for the destruction of Islam, but they do talk tough and so does our military, and that's all that mattered to fignres and that's all he needed to counter your point that we don't talk like they do. If an officer says anything the lines of "We'll get the bastards who did this" it becomes morally equvillent to "DEATH TO IMPERIALIST ZIONIST PIGS! PUSH ISRAEL INTO THE SEA! DEATH TO AMERICA! THE MURDER OF AMERICANS AND JEWS IS PLEASING TO ALLAH ULULULULULULULULULULU"

I knew there was a Kimmit in the CPA, that was about it. I have no idea what quote of his that fignuts was talking about, but I'm sure we could find something from him condemning the actions of violent insurgents.

And, gosh, isn't that the same thing as terrorism? Who are we to take one side and not the other, when what we REALLY should be acting like FatFignuts and arguing that everyone, everywhere is wrong, especially if you think Al Qaeda was responsible for 9-11. Say, did you know there's some anti-semetic sites on the Internet that cast doubt on that? Fatfginres had the link around here somewhere . . .

The quote you can't seem to find:

"Fallujah will be pacified, just as Tikrit has been pacified, just as Samarra has been pacified, just as Baqubah has been pacified. It will be at a time and a place of our choosing. It will be methodical. It will be precise and it will be overwhelming...we will kill them or we will capture them."

Kimmitt, Baghdad, April 1.

Bremer also vowed to "punish" the perpetrators.

Bummer, he's back. *sigh*

One more time, fingers, with FEELING:

You claimed Peter Singer does not believe animals and humans are equal. When pressed, you admitted that Peter Singer believes animals and humans are equal... but that there's "subtleties".

You continued to claim that Peter Singer does not advocate the killing of deformed children despite proof to the contrary: He claims it is not wrong. That's the same as claiming it is right.

You pendanticly claim that there is no proof that Al Qaeda was responsible for 9-11 despite admitting yourself that you think they did and have no reason to think otherwise.

You base your arguments on falsehoods and things you don't even believe yourself. You are a liar.

And I said this before you Andrea said she banned you.

And I said this before you Andrea said she banned you.

Scratch the extra "you"

And I note that instead of addressing that, you're focusing Kimmit's quote instead.

No! Sortelli, you amaze me. Anti-semitic web sites that actually say that the JOOOOOOOS are responsible. Migawd, I never knew that!

And d'you know, that I never thought that saying "we'll get the bastards" might be the moral equivalent of supporting terrorism!! Oh, the horror of it all!

Gosh, do you think that fathead might actually be on to something? I'm not sure what freakface was talking about myself, but that doesn't matter! The liberal way is to refute all, speak much, mean little, and understand nothing! Al Qaeda is not guilty! American is Evil! Hamas is a peaceful organization! Some anti-semitic web site says so! Allah Ahkbar!!!

Now, please excuse me, my tin foil hat fell off during my rant, and I need to fix forthwith.

refute all, speak much, mean little, and understand nothing!

That way, when people argue with you you can claim to be misunderstood, and when people dismiss and insult you for your silliness you you can claim to be oppressed.

You should use it as your tagline, Fingers.

Ugh. I wondered where that stench came from. Fartfingers returns.

OK, bubba, you're an idiot, we all know this. It's too bad you have to show off, but I've dealt with worse.

"Fallujah will be pacified, just as Tikrit has been pacified, just as Samarra has been pacified, just as Baqubah has been pacified. It will be at a time and a place of our choosing. It will be methodical. It will be precise and it will be overwhelming...we will kill them or we will capture them."

Well, la de da! Sortelli, you were right again! A straightforward statement promising justice (not revenge, note the "or we will capture them" qualifier) to terrorists is twisted and mutated into crap. Isn't the human mind amazing? Nuance, what a concept!

OK, fartfingers, you may consider yourself an orator and philosopher of the highest order, but that's because you're a legend in your own mind.

If you want to argue, please do so. I actually enjoy a good debate with the other side. But this is not a debate, it's a recorded message from you, the INTERNET equivalent of, "I'm not here, please leave a message at the beep".

Only the beep is smarter than you. Go away.

Well, if none of you can keep civil....

Hey, Sortelli! fatfingers has been oppressed*!

*"...when people dismiss and insult you for your silliness you you can claim to be oppressed."

I hope the guy with that big mole on his face is next

Funny how one killing is "justice to terrorists" and the other is "revenge". Both are a call to violent retaliation in response to fatal attacks, are they not? Nuances! Yes, they do exist!

Quit mewling for civility, that's a cheap dodge.

If you wish to validate terrorist attacks like that, or to put unlawful and bloodthirsty Saddamite thugs on a level with our forces you don't deserve any.

I second that opinion Sortelli.

> Before you read too much into my posts, let me assure you that just because someone is the underdog means that they are in the right. What it does do is transfer some of the responsibility for resolution.

But what if you actually have influence? (which is the only time it matters) You support the under dog until they become sure of victory, then they are not the underdog anymore.. switch sides eh? How about if they split in two?

Supporting the underdog creates violence because it supports individuals in starting struggles against states no matter how unjustified their position because they know they can get support for it from various "underdog supporters" One could create a business of being an underdog. Blowing up women and children just increases the coverage and therefore the support. Therefore it is rational to take a definite moral position which therefore encourages moral behaviour in both parties (not just one).

> If a 10-year-old and a 20-year-old get into a fight, who do you think has the power and therefore responsibility to resolve it peacefully?

A) we are talking about a 10 yr old with a knife and a 20 yr old with a knife here because you cannot just hold back a suicide bomber with your hand and be "OK".
B) the 10 yr old has to learn not to try to kill 20 year olds or he isn't going too live to be 20... so don't encourage him!

Wow. I spend an excellent day at a garden party for QEII's birthday at the British Ambassador's house, swigging her very delicious Pimm's No. 1 all afternoon, and after emerging from my alcohol-induced coma I find that another chunk of shit has been flushed down history's toilet bowl. What an excellent weekend this is shaping up to be.

The real kicker would be if the IDF napalmed the ranting Pali mobs calling for revenge and killed three or four thousand of them. Now that would be a robust response to terrorism.

Oh, yes. Nothing like thousands of dead civilians to raise the bar of this thread. *eyeroll*

They could cover the crowd with orange smoke...

The palistinians would not be able to believe it was not deadly even if they did it several times, good for dispersing major rallies without providing pictures of gased palistinians.

or how about dye that doesn't come off for ages (then you can tell the hamas protesters at checkpoints for the next week or so.

These Hamas KIAs are not revenge killings. The Israelis are not that emotional. They could have killed these two Hamas soldiers any time they felt like it. And if leaving Yassin and/or Rantisi alive helped Israel achieve her objective Israel I believe would not have the slightest problem in doing so. What I believe Israel is doing is implementing a new strategy to deal with the PA. Arafat and the PA do not want to share power or to battle it out with Hamas for ultimate control of the PA, as has been reported, because the present PA will lose and they know it. So Arafat and the PA are the actual benefactors of Israel's decapitating of Hamas. Israel is also sending Arafat a unambiguous message which is: Alright dirtbag we can and will keep Hamas off of your and the PA's backs. But if you don't start honest negotiations as the true heads of the Palestinian people we're just gonna sit back and let Hamas whack you and the rest of the PA slimeballs and become the de facto head of the Palestinian people. Then we'll simply eviscerate Hamas and get the deal we want with whichever Palestinian is left alive and in charge. So it is in the PA's best interest to deal with us instead of having to deal with Hamas. But rest assured Yassir there will be a negoiated settlement between our two peoples. Your decision is whether it will be with you now or with someone who will be alive later on. Take a long hot bath with real soap, mull it over, and then get back to us on it. Ciao baby.

And if Hamas is real stupid if it thinks it can keep the indentity of the new leader of secret from the Mossad. Good fucking luck you shit for brains terrorists.

ban the fartfinger!!

"If a 10-year-old and a 20-year-old get into a fight, who do you think has the power and therefore responsibility to resolve it peacefully?"

This, actually, becomes a suprisingly good argument in favour of Israel's building of the security fence.

As much as Palestinians may objecft to the fence, it is in itself peaceful: no one is going to die by acts of violence comitted by the fence itself.

But it may well stop the terrorists. By building it, Israel is discharging its responsibility.

or how about dye that doesn't come off for ages

Ha ha ha! Now that's an idea, Scottie. I like it. :)

Of course, the conspiracy theories about how the dye was a chemical attack would start flying instantly, and there would be sick children carted out left and right and held up as victims.

Then fatfingers would probably wander around making comparisons between Nazi gas chambers and orange dye attacks.

Bah. I'm still worked up over that punk. I want the record to show that in the past two threads he has compared Bush to Hitler for justifying an invasion on humanitarian grounds, he has made and defended false statements to bolster his case, argues from positions he thinks are wrong, he uses his anonimity as a defence, and he morally equated terrorism and the anti-democracy insurgents in Iraq with the Coalition forces.

And when called on it all he could do was play the victim and complain that we insult him or try to ban him because we can't respond. But he still hasn't addressed any of the responses . . .

Bleh. Smacking trolls is so anti-climatic.

Doesn't anyone know if the IDF used a SNURB T-104 Hellbrick or not?

Then fatfingers would probably wander around making comparisons between Nazi gas chambers and orange dye attacks.

I think not he's more likely to contend that the Gas Chambers never existed.
however we know the talents of Pal film producers are worthy of Oscars as in the Al Dura co production with the France 2 public TV network.

> "the left are usually on the side of the Palestinians because they are on the losing side of the power equation"

Believe it or not, the "underdog principle" is actually a highly accurate heuristic for predicting which way the fat ugly frog of modern Leftistry will jump on any given issue. The Left supported Israel (its, err, bacon was saved in 1948 by arms shipments from the Czech Communist regime) up until 1967. Then the Jews stopped being victims and started seriously fighting people who wanted to kill them. Right about then, the Left decided that Israel was a racist colonial apartheid imperialist settler state and had always been one (ie, its stripping of Left Credibility occurred in 1967 but was retroactively backdated two decades).

Orwell wrote this in 1939 about Dickens:

"Where he [Dickens] is a Christian is in his quasi-instinctive siding with the oppressed against the oppressors. As a matter of course he is on the side of the underdog, always and everywhere. To carry this to its logical conclusion, one has got to change sides whenever the underdog becomes an upperdog, and in fact Dickens does tend to do so. He loathes the Catholic Church, for instance, but as soon as the Catholics are persecuted (Barnaby Rudge) he is on their side. He loathes the aristocratic class even more, but as soon as they are really overthrown (the revolutionary chapters in A Tale of Two Cities), his sympathies swing around."

> "the left are usually on the side of the Palestinians because they are on the losing side of the power equation"

-Which means that the Left would've been on Hitler's side before the invasion of Czechoslovakia proved Germany wasn't a "loser" anymore, and that they would have been on the Soviet side in late 1980 and 1990 when it was obvious the USSR was headed for the ash-heaps of History, and the Left certainly would be approving most strongly of Al Quaeda right now.

Oh wait...

Selected responses to Rantisi's assassination:

Yasser Arafat: "This will not shake our resolve. None of us are afraid. We are all willing to embrace martyrdom", said the PA leader, speaking from his titanium-walled windowless office, tightly surrounded by a circle of children, old ladies in wheelchairs, and blind men carrying cute kittens. He then squealed and wet his pants as a car backfired some three blocks away.

Robert Fisk: "A new star burns in heaven tonight," sobbed a distraught Fisk. "Why do the good always die so young?" This was the second traumatic incident of the day for Mr. Fisk, who had earlier been harassed by two 8-year-old Afghani refugees, who gave him a wedgie and indian burns and played 'keep-away' with his glasses.

aus.politics sage and master debater, Peter Terry: "Who giveds the Zionazies permission for their cowardly murders? Yanky doodly daley! Who blew up the world trade centre as an excuse to take over the middle east? Yanky dooley daley! Who stole my meds AND my meth pipe? Yanky dooldey daley! Nerghh ggarrggghhhh weeble yigweeehhh..."

The Guardian: "CLICHEGENERATOR caused an invalid page fault in module CYCLEOFVIOLENCE.DLL. If the problem persists, blame Israel."

Uncle Milk, there was something noble about Dickens.

The Left don't really side with the Underdog, they just pick the vilest, most filthy. destructive, anti-human thing they can find and side with that.

Sue:

The Left don't really side with the Underdog, they just pick the vilest, most filthy. destructive, anti-human thing they can find and side with that.

Actually, the left tends to take the easiest path, the one that lets them "feel" morally superior without all the work that the morally superior actions really require.

It's just that that the easier path often leads to the vilest, most filthy, destructive, anti-human thing they can find.

You know -- someone else does their thinking for them, and they can follow along like sheep. Karl Marx started the trend, and these are his ideological descendants.

No wonder the Soviet Union collapsed, and socialism is going bankrupt just about everywhere else.

Oooh, fathead signed on with a different IP, what mojo! I bow before your mighty kung fu! NOT.

Guys, let's put it to a vote: should I ban fatass again (I can only do it one IP at a time -- If I try to ban a wider IP range it might cut some of you off too), or should I simply replace his comments with something more appropriate, such as "Nnnggnhghgnnnnhhh! Mmmffffhhh!" or "I'm a little teapot, short and stout!" Your call.

I vote for replacing fartfinger's posts. That ought to be entertaining, especially if you imagine his frustrations at not being able to correct us. "I meant 'arrrggggghhhh!', not 'nnnnnggghhhh!', Andrea."

Regarding the update:

Kinda reminds me of the Monty Python sketch "How Not to be Seen."

Israel, as the occupying power, has the gunpower, the manpower, and it clearly has the will. Why can't it go house-to-house till it finds alleged murderers like Rantisi drag them before a properly constituted court, and try them for their crimes? If they tried them under Israeli law, presented evidence before Israeli courts, and proved their guilt, who would dare complain?

Why does Israel think it can gain any legitimacy by using helicopter gunships on civilian populations, in city streets?

Consensus on the blogmire is all for targeted assassinations, fuck the rule of law - barbarism rules.

Miranda! You surprise me. You actually post something that is not sniping, insulting, or parrot squawking. Indeed, you ask intelligent questions. Until the last paragraph, that is. Alas, old habits die hard.

But I shall endeavor to repond in kind:

Israel, as the occupying power, has the gunpower, the manpower, and it clearly has the will. Why can't it go house-to-house till it finds alleged murderers like Rantisi drag them before a properly constituted court, and try them for their crimes? If they tried them under Israeli law, presented evidence before Israeli courts, and proved their guilt, who would dare complain?

Well, there's this road map to peace. It's a two state solution, resulting in Palestine and Isreal. The problem is that while Arrafat signed up for this at least twice (once when he won his Nobel Peace Prize, and more recently with Secretary Powell), he isn't keeping his word. And Hamas (and like minded organizations) want a one state solution -- the destruction of Isreal.

The Palestinian Authority is supposed to quash terrorist groups like Hamas -- but doesn't. Hamas continued with their homicide attacks. Yet, Palestine is a separate country. Isreal only occupies parts of it, and is trying to get out of most that.

So going door-to-door in the PA area is a daunting task, especially when mothers encourage their children to stand in front of soldiers so that they can be martyrs. Or carry bombs into Isreal.

Besides, I expect the left wingers of the world to object to door-to-door searches without a proper search warrant. So would the thousands of Palestinians who routinely throng the streets, volunteering to be martyrs. Again.

And we haven't even gotten to an actual trial as yet. Ranitisi publically supportedthe murder of women and children, but I'll bet cheap lawyers from all over the world would offer their services pro bono for the publicity.

The task is daunting. Isreal is taking a realistic approach to an unswerving enemy.

Why does Israel think it can gain any legitimacy by using helicopter gunships on civilian populations, in city streets?

Why do the Palestinians think they can gain legitimacy by using homicide bombers and random shootings against civilian populations, in city streets?

Turning the question around is not an answer, but it does demonstrate the hypocrisy of the Palestinians.

To answer it: I don't know that Isreal is looking for legitimacy. Because they wouldn't get it, as has been clearly demonstrated over and over again. They are looking to stop the violence by killing the violent. At least they use targeting systems, as opposed to the omnidirectional trajectories of shrapnel initiated by Palestinian homicide bombers.

Consensus on the blogmire is all for targeted assassinations, fuck the rule of law - barbarism rules.

Like I said -- old habits die hard.

Don't argue with the blogparrot, Jeffs -- its offerings are merely repeats of what it read on the floor of its cage, which is usually lined with old copies of The Weekly Worker.

Andrea: "JeffS, come inside this instant!"

JeffS: "Awwwww, Mom!!! I was just starting to have fun!! Now I gotta come in and do chores and homework and stuff. All the other kids parents aren't making them come in!"

Andrea: "I know, but it's for your own good. Now come inside. And don't tease the parrot anymore, Miranda isn't a toy, she's a putzy little thing and quite annoying, but we must ignore her rants. And as I'm tired of cleaning her cage, you will do it."

JeffS: "Gee, Mom, do I have to? Her crap really smells bad. Couldn't we just lock her in the closet or something?"

Andrea: "No. Shut up and get moving before I send you to the Democratic Underground."

JeffS: "Yes, Mom! Right away! I'll be good! I promise!"

Don't forget to use the wire brush! That poop is like cement when it hardens.