Moonbat alert: Chomksy condemns Bin Laden kill.

Pardalis said:
Hamas don't speak for the Palestinian people, they speak for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Click to expand...

The Israel-haters declare Hamas the "voice of the people" when they want Israel to cave in to its demands, and a "dictatorial clique" when they want to distance its murderous thuggery and ideology from them. But the truth is the Palestinians openly and knowingly voted for a murderous terrorist Islamist organization as their leaders.

Of course the next thing it did was to kill all political opponents and cancel all future elections (apart from the meaningless one-party predetermined-results kabuki theatre), but that is rather typical of the kind of "freedom fighters" the Israel-haters support elsewhere in the world (Cuba, for instance), and somehow they don't claim those regimes do not represent the people...
 
Pardalis said:
Hamas don't speak for the Palestinian people, they speak for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The Palestinian people elected Hamas, and by democratic standards, are as responsible for Hamas's actions as the German people were for the Nazis.
 
Folks, please do not personalize your arguments, and please keep things civil. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL
 
bikerdruid said:
as would the germans, if it were not from the fuel they bought from rockefeller.
the u.s was so late entering the war, because they were busy making money supplying both sides of the war.
Click to expand...

This is a bewildering revision of history you are making here.

You do remember that it was STALIN of the USSR who was the primary collaborator with Hitler and who carved up Poland with him. So while the Soviets didn't actually come in "late" they came in on the wrong side and spent a lot of their time invading neutral nations.

The US, on the other hand, was providing shipping convoys to the UK and couldn't join the war because there was a strong isolationist movement within the US called the America First Committee who argued that there was no point entering a war in which they haven't been attacked. It's certainly unusual to see you becoming a retrospective belligerent given that your policies are usually so pacifist. Why are you so pro-war when the US isn't and anti-war when the US is pro-war?

Anyway, which Rockefeller are you talking about?
 
angrysoba said:
You do remember that it was STALIN of the USSR who was the primary collaborator with Hitler and who carved up Poland with him.
Click to expand...
If you remember, STALIN wasn't the only one carving up countries with Hitler. There was also a certain Mr. CHAMBERLAIN who led the way, over STALIN's protest.
 
Gazpacho said:
If you remember, STALIN wasn't the only one carving up countries with Hitler. There was also a certain Mr. CHAMBERLAIN who led the way, over STALIN's protest.
Click to expand...

Chamberlain didn't invade Czechoslovakia. He dithered away a deal with Hitler which was also very popular with those who wanted to avert war.

Stalin did invade Poland. You're surely not equating Chamberlain and Stalin's behaviour are you?
 
angrysoba said:
This is a bewildering revision of history you are making here.

You do remember that it was STALIN of the USSR who was the primary collaborator with Hitler and who carved up Poland with him. So while the Soviets didn't actually come in "late" they came in on the wrong side and spent a lot of their time invading neutral nations.

The US, on the other hand, was providing shipping convoys to the UK and couldn't join the war because there was a strong isolationist movement within the US called the America First Committee who argued that there was no point entering a war in which they haven't been attacked. It's certainly unusual to see you becoming a retrospective belligerent given that your policies are usually so pacifist. Why are you so pro-war when the US isn't and anti-war when the US is pro-war?

Anyway, which Rockefeller are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Rockefeller did fund Hitler whether you want to believe it or not.
 
angrysoba said:
Chamberlain didn't invade Czechoslovakia. He dithered away a deal with Hitler which was also very popular with those who wanted to avert war.
Click to expand...
The purpose of the M-R pact was also to avert war. By the time Hitler got around to invading Poland, it was clear that his MO was to to take as much of a country as he possibly could.
 
Vampire said:
Rockefeller did fund Hitler whether you want to believe it or not.
Click to expand...

The question was which Rockefeller?

(Aside from the fact that he didn't constitute the US government, there were of course a lot of businessmen who did deals all over the shop. With Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin etc... Henry Ford had a picture of Adolf on his desk and the Daily Mail in England ran "Three Cheers for the Blackshirts!" headlines and Lord Halifax and the abdicated King Edward loved Hitler. Yes, yes, I know.)
 
Gazpacho said:
The purpose of the M-R pact was also to avert war. By the time Hitler got around to invading Poland, it was clear that his MO was to to take as much of a country as he possibly could.
Click to expand...

You mean because it was called the Non-Aggression Pact? And there was no war? And Stalin didn't invade Poland or Finland? And Stalin didn't have the Polish officer corps slaughtered at Katyn?
 
angrysoba said:
It's certainly unusual to see you becoming a retrospective belligerent given that your policies are usually so pacifist. Why are you so pro-war when the US isn't and anti-war when the US is pro-war?
Click to expand...

i am always 'anti-war'....always.
i do support a people's right to fight against their oppressive and murderous regimes, but i do not support war.
please, prove otherwise....
 
bikerdruid said:
i am always 'anti-war'....always.
i do support a people's right to fight against their oppressive and murderous regimes, but i do not support war.
please, prove otherwise....
Click to expand...

What's with all the sneering about the US turning up to WWII late?

Surely according to your principles they should never have fought at all.
 
Ziggurat said:
You've moved your goalpost.
Click to expand...

not at all...
i merely provided clarification for those who, consciously or unconsciously, miss the obvious in my posts.
for example:
i do support the struggle of the palestinian people against the oppressive and murderous israeli government.
i do not support the american war of aggression against iraq.
 
Last edited:
bikerdruid said:
i am always 'anti-war'....always.
i do support a people's right to fight against their oppressive and murderous regimes, but i do not support war.
please, prove otherwise....
Click to expand...
So you support the right of Israel to strike back at Hamas?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom