If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
The Regressive Left are the perfect "useful idiots" for Islam.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Even members of the Israeli security establishment are losing patience with Netanyahu's intransigence.
Long-serving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces a potentially formidable challenge to his hard-line rule — not from Israel's civilian politicians but instead from its revered security establishment.
An extraordinary array of former top commanders are criticizing Netanyahu in increasingly urgent terms, accusing him of mishandling the Palestinian issue and allying with extremists bent on dismantling Israel's democracy.
On Tuesday, a group representing more than 200 retired leaders in Israel's military, police, Mossad spy service and Shin Bet security agency presented a plan to help end the half-century occupation of the Palestinians through unilateral steps, including disavowing claims to over 90 percent of the West Bank and freezing Jewish settlement construction in such areas.
The movement, called Commanders for Israel's Security, reflects an increasingly widespread assessment that Israel is drifting catastrophically toward permanent entanglement with the Palestinians and conflict with the world community.
"Things are getting worse and worse," said retired Maj. Gen. Amnon Reshef, the group's founder and a former commander of Israel's armored corps. "What kind of future do we have here? What are we going to leave for our kids and young children?"
Although a peace deal may not be possible at present, "still something can and should be done right now," he said
The driving narrative is that the Holy Land's 6 million Jews must find a way of detaching themselves from the roughly equivalent number of Arabs, most of whom live in the West Bank and Gaza and do not have voting rights in Israel.
Without the establishment of a Palestinian state, the argument goes, Israel will either eventually have to extend voting rights, formally absorbing the Palestinians in the occupied territories and destroying itself as a Jewish-majority country, or else be branded a non-democracy destined to suffer comparisons to South African apartheid and risking a similar fate.
Surveys among youth around the world, even in the U.S., suggest that cliff is coming.
Netanyahu and his Cabinet have shown little interest in changing course.
He does profess a theoretical desire for a two-state solution. But in practice, his government busies itself with the Palestinian leadership's shortcomings — publicizing incidents of "incitement" against Jews is a frequent theme — while continuing to settle territory, occupied in the 1967 Mideast war, where the Palestinians hope to establish a state.
Following years of failed peace efforts and occasional violence, Israel pulled troops and settlers out of the Gaza Strip in 2005. But in the West Bank, hundreds of thousands of settlers receive an array of subsidies and privileges in what is in effect an Israeli colony. The Palestinian majority there does not have Israeli citizenship and lives under a mix of limited autonomy and Israeli military rule.
It'll either be a A) a two-state solution, B) a one-state solution, or C) outright genocide. And that's up to the Israeli government. Because the status quo is simply untenable.
Apparently there truly are things more effective at killing than guns. It's extremely unlikely a single gunman could have killed that many people, not in the open. Horrifying.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Well, I'm glad we're all been my transparent that we use these events to score political points.
To wit, I know driving enthusiasts won't balk at additional regulations and safety features being introduced to prevent this kind of thing from being so easily executed or repeated at all as an infringement on their rights.
Well, I'm glad we're all been my transparent that we use these events to score political points.
The POTUS taught us how.
To wit, I know driving enthusiasts won't balk at additional regulations and safety features being introduced to prevent this kind of thing from being so easily executed or repeated at all as an infringement on their rights.
Big trucks need "kill" switches, if used in cities, to allow authorities to stop them in such situations. This should have been implemented years ago.
Now, got eat a bowl of dicks, assholes.
Where were these harsh words when Obama was in Dallas "scoring points" for the anti-gun lobby and BLM?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
originally posted by Facebook.
This attack in Nice was a busted operation. The savage had grenades and rifles....these were probably going to be distributed to other bad guys...then an attack from all sides. The driver panicked or was too close to getting caught....and used the truck as a weapon. Just my guess...
Can't be, there are no guns in France, they've been banned.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Well, I'm glad we're all been my transparent that we use these events to score political points.
Pot, kettle a little bit don't you think? I thought about not offering my commmentary, but given how every attack is used by the anti-2A crowd to justify gun control, I fail to see how this is any different. This took place in a country where they have a complete ban on guns.
To wit, I know driving enthusiasts won't balk at additional regulations and safety features being introduced to prevent this kind of thing from being so easily executed or repeated at all as an infringement on their rights.
Just what the hell would a kill switch in the truck have done here? It took the driver seconds to run all those people those people down. Even if we were generous and said 5 minutes to complete the act, there's no way anyone would be able to react fast enough to do any good.That's a pipe dream - such a measure would be feel good only, while introducing huge costs and potentials for abuse.
Now, got eat a bowl of dicks, assholes.
Could you please provide some of the sand in your vagina as a side dish? You seem to have plenty to spare.
I had Wendy's, which is admittedly closer to a bag of dicks than I'm comfortable with. Chicken dicks, but still.
Subego,
What are your thoughts on the "kill switch" idea....even beyond potential abuse do you see this as a practical way to stop an attack? Why/Why not?
Not really.
The only way someone could activate it quickly enough would be for the system to be wide-open from a security standpoint.
Even if I'm wrong here, the math doesn't work out. The same way the math doesn't work out with rifles and mass shootings. Neither happen with enough frequency to justify the extreme steps required to stop them.
The only way someone could activate it quickly enough would be for the system to be wide-open from a security standpoint.
Even if I'm wrong here, the math doesn't work out. The same way the math doesn't work out with rifles and mass shootings. Neither happen with enough frequency to justify the extreme steps required to stop them.
I thought you and I might be thinking similarly here. I agree, there's just no practical way this could be an effective means to do any good.
I think I might already know how you'll feel about this, but how about a "no-fly, no drive" list? If terrorists can't drive, they can't kill people. /s
I thought you and I might be thinking similarly here. I agree, there's just no practical way this could be an effective means to do any good.
I think I might already know how you'll feel about this, but how about a "no-fly, no drive" list? If terrorists can't drive, they can't kill people. /s
We pretty much have a no-drive list, only no one has come up with the idea of linking it to the no-fly list.
Theres an almost gleeful smugness in the way some of you are talking about this, all because you think it exemplifies your favourite point and therefore justifies you keeping your favourite toys. Dakar is right to tell you to eat dicks.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
Well, I'm glad we're all been my transparent that we use these events to score political points.
To wit, I know driving enthusiasts won't balk at additional regulations and safety features being introduced to prevent this kind of thing from being so easily executed or repeated at all as an infringement on their rights.
Now, got eat a bowl of dicks, assholes.
Originally Posted by subego
Since I wasn't told whether I was supposed to eat a bag of dicks, I had White Castle.
Originally Posted by Snow-i
I had Wendy's, which is admittedly closer to a bag of dicks than I'm comfortable with. Chicken dicks, but still.
Subego,
What are your thoughts on the "kill switch" idea....even beyond potential abuse do you see this as a practical way to stop an attack? Why/Why not?
Originally Posted by Snow-i
And also, you should always err on the side of eating dicks.
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep
Theres an almost gleeful smugness in the way some of you are talking about this, all because you think it exemplifies your favourite point and therefore justifies you keeping your favourite toys. Dakar is right to tell you to eat dicks.
Theres an almost gleeful smugness in the way some of you are talking about this, all because you think it exemplifies your favourite point and therefore justifies you keeping your favourite toys. Dakar is right to tell you to eat dicks.
Not nearly to the level of His Smugness, our Commander in Queef.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Theres an almost gleeful smugness in the way some of you are talking about this, all because you think it exemplifies your favourite point and therefore justifies you keeping your favourite toys. Dakar is right to tell you to eat dicks.
Okay, now I get it. I honestly didn't understand where the bag of dicks was coming from.
I don't really approve with how the sentiment has been expressed by people in this thread, but the smugness isn't occuring in a vacuum.
Am I supposed to believe it's merely the smugness which is causing the repulsion? If the argument was brought up outside the context of a current event, it would be met with reasoned discussion rather than an implication the position is morally deficient?
(
Last edited by subego; Jul 16, 2016 at 09:31 AM.
)
When has CTP needed anything to believe whatever he is talking about other than he said so?
^^ That's why we have brawls in the PWL, guys. It's compulsive, isn't it? You're utterly incapable of addressing issues without lashing out at other members.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
"Lashing out"? Or merely an observation of your typical M.O.?
I'll tell you what. Since you want to talk about "issues" I was just co-signing on Paco500's statement. Remember YOU were the one who claimed that there were no guns in France because they had been banned. Snow-i made a similar claim but quite unlike yourself he's demonstrated that he's actually capable of acknowledging when he's in error. Which is why my comment above was only in reference to you. So I'll offer up this on the topic ...
I really don't feel like wrestling with trying to quote the relevant portions. The forums are even LESS mobile friendly in the iOS 10 public beta. So see for yourself that guns are by no means "banned" in France. Now what I'm saying here is that you had no basis to make such a claim other than you said so. I guess because it fits your preferred narrative and little things like facts be damned. So feel free to either produce your evidence to the contrary or keep it moving. Because we all know you definitely won't admit that you are simply categorically wrong on this point.
Theres an almost gleeful smugness in the way some of you are talking about this, all because you think it exemplifies your favourite point and therefore justifies you keeping your favourite toys. Dakar is right to tell you to eat dicks.
It's defeated sarcasm/cynicism, not smugness, as yet another 100 or so people are dead and we're no closer to figuring out how to stop this. And the last few times this has happened we had to hear you and many others, including the potus & HRC, on about how we stop this with gun control.
if you'd use your brain instead of your vagina to see why I'm sayin what I'm saying, you might see why beating me over the head with your own tactic gets the response it gets. So I'll eat your bag of dicks just as soon as y'all stop acting like said bag of dicks. You don't get to take the high road here, Mr Pot. The kettle is calling you out.
"Lashing out"? Or merely an observation of your typical M.O.?
I'll tell you what. Since you want to talk about "issues" I was just co-signing on Paco500's statement. Remember YOU were the one who claimed that there were no guns in France because they had been banned. Snow-i made a similar claim but quite unlike yourself he's demonstrated that he's actually capable of acknowledging when he's in error. Which is why my comment above was only in reference to you. So I'll offer up this on the topic ...
I really don't feel like wrestling with trying to quote the relevant portions. The forums are even LESS mobile friendly in the iOS 10 public beta. So see for yourself that guns are by no means "banned" in France. Now what I'm saying here is that you had no basis to make such a claim other than you said so. I guess because it fits your preferred narrative and little things like facts be damned. So feel free to either produce your evidence to the contrary or keep it moving. Because we all know you definitely won't admit that you are simply categorically wrong on this point.
OAW
Yes, my error. I was wrong on that. My original point stands, however.
Remember YOU were the one who claimed that there were no guns in France because they had been banned.
No, I was mocking those who think banning guns will keep them out. It's absurd to think there are no guns in a place, even if they've been banned, because criminals will ignore laws. Why should I need to explain this?
Because we all know you definitely won't admit that you are simply categorically wrong on this point.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Okay, now I get it. I honestly didn't understand where the bag of dicks was coming from.
I don't really approve with how the sentiment has been expressed by people in this thread, but the smugness isn't occuring in a vacuum.
Am I supposed to believe it's merely the smugness which is causing the repulsion? If the argument was brought up outside the context of a current event, it would be met with reasoned discussion rather than an implication the position is morally deficient?
People gloating that an enemy of their own nation mowed down a hundred citizens of an allied nation celebrating their independence day is utterly repugnant yes. I wouldn't think I'd have to explain that to anyone here. Or anywhere else.
As for a more rational discussion, if you don't know the difference between a disgruntled brat on a killing spree and a brainwashed disgruntled terrorist brat on a killing spree then you really shouldn't bother to comment. Yes they have things in common, but there are reasons that American lunatics don't tend to choose kamikaze vehicle runs as their preferred method of teaching the world a lesson.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
People gloating that an enemy of their own nation mowed down a hundred citizens of an allied nation celebrating their independence day is utterly repugnant yes. I wouldn't think I'd have to explain that to anyone here. Or anywhere else.
As Snow-i said, it's not gloating, it's frustration.
It's pretty damned obvious, or rather, it would be pretty damned obvious, if you weren't you, and you didn't have a bee up your ass over anything I say.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Whew. I'm glad you finally see it, for a while there I thought you'd plunged to new, as-yet-not-seen-before, depths of idiocy. Have a good nap.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Top