On Cowardice

[250]

Originally posted by skywalker: quote:

wrong mate, I was being inlligently humorus. yourz iz misuzed energy creatz malicious attack!!

[skywalker]

Originally posted by 250: wrong mate, I was being inlligently humorus. yourz iz misuzed energy creatz malicious attack!!

I doubt it. Your post was a disgusting cheapshot.

Mark



[This message has been edited by skywalker (edited 10-09-2001).]

[Sir Taliesin]

Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown: If the first example is cowardly, then the last example is too, John D., provided that the person threatening to kick ass is much stronger than his target. Where is the bravery in a strong person beating up on someone who can't really hurt him back, as is typically the case with the way the US wages wars with its planes and missles?

Oh, so it's your contention that we should never strike back, even though the enemy has proven that they are quite capable of taking out thousands of our people (actually the world's people since at least 60 countrys had folks that worked there). Sorry, don't buy what your selling. Mulla Omar had plenty of advanced warning that we where going to kick his ass unless the Taliban gave up Al Quada. We would not have to resort to military action had the Taliban just given up the terrorists. They could have done that really easy. But no, they think that just because the kicked the russians in the behind 10 years ago that they can do the same thing to us. Well that's not going to happen now, is it. Of course, on the other hand we could have just imposed sanctions on Afganistan and starved all their people to death. That could have been another option. No, the Taliban brought this on their own selves. Let them reap what they sowed. Omar needs to get in his jeep and drive!

------------------
Sir Taliesin



If they take my gun can I still use my Axe?

[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: Oh, so it's your contention that we should never strike back, even though the enemy has proven that they are quite capable of taking out thousands of our people (actually the world's people since at least 60 countrys had folks that worked there).

*sigh*

No, Sir T. That is not what I am saying at all.

As for the immediate topic, the question here was solely whether the terrorists were cowards, that's all. It has nothing to do with what we should be doing in response, which I have addressed many times on other threads.

[250]

Originally posted by skywalker: I doubt it. Your post was a disgusting cheapshot. Mark

whatever then, comparing against me... that was really most uncalled for.
I am actually glad that someone thinks he can make cheapshots because I made cheapshots

did I bash Clinton? oops, accidentally did. but I dont give a ... (Sazarc ran in, and knocks 250 out with a bat)

**five mins later, resume concious**

ack... I don't give a damn about bashing Clinton, if you base your decision on that, then go ahead.

[This message has been edited by 250 (edited 10-09-2001).]

[skywalker]

250! Why are you insulting me?

Mark

[Edit. 250, I appreciate you edited out calling me an "idiot", but it still was insulting. I've not insulted anyone here, so far.]

[This message has been edited by skywalker (edited 10-09-2001).]

[Sir Taliesin]

Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown: What we did to the people of Iraq was criminal. Perhaps one million civilians died from our actions in the war and afterwards, from direct and indirect causes. Regarding your point about not really meaning to hit civilians with bombs: a brief digression to the law of Murder is informative. To be Murder, it is necessary that the defendant have some Intent to kill the victim. Now, that does not mean that the defendant has to act with the PURPOSE of killing the victim, it is only necessary for guilt that he act in the KNOWLEDGE that death will likely result. For example, say someone blows up a building, knowing that there are people inside. Say his only purpose is because he thinks the building is a complete eyesore, and he can tolerate its existence no longer. He has no desire whatsover to kill any people, only the building. That makes NO DIFFERENCE under the traditional law of Murder, and it shouldn't. It is enough for guilt that he acted in the knowledge that death would result. When you blow up buildings, or target civilian populated areas, it is a empty, hollow claim indeed that your purpose was not to kill the people inside. The phrase "collateral damage" was a popular american euphemism for hiding our war crimes in the Gulf War.

First of all, I only wish war was as clean as you think it needs to be. Second of all, is it our fault that the Iraqi's set up their military targets in the middle of civilian populations? If they had been building a nuclear weapon under a hospital, would tat hospital have been a viable military target? What do you believe? I know what I believe. I'd have blown that place to kingdom come!!! What about a chemical weapons factory in an elementary school. Is that a viable target? Damn straight it is! Especially in the hands of a man that is willing to use such weapons! I was in the Gulf War. I regret now that we didn't finish him off, but I didn't feel that way at the time. At the time I was afraid that the rest of the Arab world would turn on us and we'd have to fight our way back out. I think that's waht a lot of our people thought too. If I had it to do over again Saddam would be died and his head on a gate in Bagdad for all the world to see. I also regret that we didn't help the Shites in the south and the Kurds in the north after the war was over. Especailly when they came begging at our compound gate for weapons to fight Saddam with. That was another mistake. But I in NO WAY regret ever going over there and doing what we did! Never!!! And yes I know what I ws there for. It was OIL plain and simple! If Saddom had gotten control over the Arabia oil fields, we'd all be cowtailling down to him now!!!


------------------
Sir Taliesin



If they take my gun can I still use my Axe?

Hmmm I see a little misconception about satanists. Cult behavior is not satanism, and its beliefs go way beyond the contempary authors that have been mentioned as "spokespeople". One of the creeds of real satanists is personal responsibility for individual actions. It has a sense of ethic, dignity, and has nothing to do with the christian concept of satan, or christianity at all, except that satanists are misconcieved by some, maybe most christians. Satanism is like Witchcraft in some regards. Small groups, simple creeds, ancient archtypes, and persecuted. Heck it has alot in common with any given religious path.[/B]

Thank you for posting this. While I am not a Satanist, through research and discovering one of my best friends was marrying one who followed this Path, I learned most of my notions of who and what they were were not only erroneous but dangerously wrong and biased.

In some aspects, yes, witchcraft is similar.

The actions of the perverted individuals described in the earlier post were cult activities of group(s) calling themselves Satanists but who, in reality, were devil worshippers. There *is* a difference, but not one these people wish to be let known because it lessens the shock factor for the perversions. The road to power is not through terror, it is through knowledge.

To my knowledge, FYI, Crowley was no Satanist but rather someone who enjoyed messing with that which he should have left alone! Brilliant and utterly stupid at the same time.

Garnet

Originally posted by Yorick: Really? I don't know many religious groups that mass rape young girls mate.

Cult behavior, not satanism. You are unaware of what I refered to arent you?
Well, I cant blame ya if you just dont know.

We dont blame all muslims because a few are terrorists, now do we? Anyone who does as you describe and calls themself a satanist, doenst know what satanism really is, just as you dont.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown: Sorry, John, we are just going have to agree to disagree here. The way the US wages war today is not some chivalrous medieveal ideal of personal bravery, risk, and honor.

Agreed it's not the first time or the last



------------------
Crustiest of the OLD COOTS
Airline ticket to Afghanistan $800
High powered rifle with scope $1000
Hotel room with roof access $100
A clean Head shot on that sack of Horse Manure Usuma Bin Laden PRICELESS!