 blueridge says: Just who fits the U.S. definition here? Who is trying to instigate "regime change" through "coercion" and "intimidation" through violence "against a civilian population"--including "property and infrastructure"--to overthrow a government to achieve "political change"? Even Israeli news has reported the objective is "assassinations" of Hamas political leaders, and they are bombing government buildings: Jerusalem Post, Israel - Dec 24, 2008 They are a constant and deadly threat to their neighbours, they have WMD's, they support terrorism, they defy the UN and they're slaughtering civilians! ... we must defend freedom and human rights and disarm Israel immediately! Oh...sorry, wrong country. That was the mantra for Iraq, not Israel. Oops, silly me. .  So, Hamas bombing Israel daily for years is just fine. But let Israel retaliate and the whole world is up in arms. What a double standard. Hamas are the terrorists. And if you wish - just let us know where we can start shooting missles daily at your house for the next 3 years. Only 1 Israeli has been killed by the occasional rockets, which were attacks provoked by Israel. Israel's "response" is therefore not proportional (nor the MSM media portrayal accurate) and in fact was a premeditated war plan, like their forthcoming ground invasion. Truthfully Hamas fits the definition above too, but this is proof that the accusation and label is arbitrary. "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". The truth is that Israel is the Oppressor and Terrorizer, and has been from the very beginning. Maybe if the UN said that the Southwestern states of the U.S. now belonged to Mexico (again), including Colorado, and Mexico then invaded and bulldozed Colorad... — Comment removed by clipper — Israel "gave up Gaza" in return for the peace that never came. Hamas contuned shooting rockets on a daily basis DURING the cease fire. Don't fool yourself about Hamas. The have rejected a two state solution and have stated that they will not rest until Israel ceases to exist. These are the facts. This is the problem that moral relativism brings us. We no longer know what is right and what is wrong. We no longer know what to laugh at or what to cry at. A question for Blueridge, what does Hamas want? Will they ever consent to living side by side with a peaceful neighbor that is not Arabic? I dont believe in moral relativism. Read my comment to Coloradoright above, an analogy into how Israel was formed. Then suddenly you may see who has been operating under "moral relativism". Hamas is in government in Gaza because the Palestinian people believe they have a right to self defense, and Hamas is the only political party willing to do it. If Israel is permitted to tyrannize, occupy, invade, etc at will, and Gaza must not fire rockets in response, then you believe in moral relativism. The law of self defense is both a law of nature and biblical as well. Israel has now begun its ground assault on Gaza, in which this article states the case plainly: Livingstone, who was ousted as London mayor in May, noted that there has been a ratio of 100 Palestinian deaths per Israeli killed in the Gaza conflict. |
View the Top Clips from December 31, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|||||
|
|
||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
||||||
