Like, I'm supposed to feel sorry for Sheikh Ahmed Yassin? Please. Show me where this scum's grave is so I can pee on it.

Once they get done scraping his butt up off the sidewalk, that is.

Forget about making nice with these bloodthirsty idiots, or trying to appease them. This is how you make peace with them;

You kill them.

No questions, no discussions, no 'peace' talks. No negotiations.

You kill them.

Period.

Sharon is correct in this action, because peace isn't what's on the terrorist's minds. Never has been, never will be.

What will bring peace to the region? The death of the Islamic terrorists, and that alone.

And as for the reaction of the PLO and it's suporters being trumpeted in the news media, how the PLO is going to respond with more killing... tell me if that's not something they'd be doing anyway... that it's not something they've been doing all along. What more can they possibly do to us? They've killed on the order of 500 people since 9/11/2000, already. Does anyone see that rate going up as a result of our taking this guy out?

And by the way, where is the other old terrorist, Arifat?

What a beautiful day! Wish I could wake up to good news like this every day!

Bithead:

Does anyone see the rate going down as a result of taking this old guy out? All this looks like is a hit. Not revenge. Not state policy. Just the murder of an inconvenient old man in a wheelchair coming out of prayers. It gives Europe another chance at condemnation. It makes it harder for the investigations of Arafat's spending of Euros to get any traction. All the press will talk about is cycle of violence, murder, the urgent need to fix the demonstrably unfixable.

If I were running Israel, I would concentrate on getting that wall built and settlers withdrawn to behind the wall. And let Arafat or whoever run the seething mess left behind. If some terrorist decides to blow up Israel after that, then let the leaders of the terrorist group have it. Revenge may taste better cold, but it's more palatable to others when eaten warm.

Does anyone see the rate going down as a result of taking this old guy out?

He's been directing it.
So the answer is 'yes'.

Just the murder of an inconvenient old man in a wheelchair coming out of prayers. It gives Europe another chance at condemnation.

So, does that mean Europe would have stopped condemming us if we'd not taken him out?

It makes it harder for the investigations of Arafat's spending of Euros to get any traction. All the press will talk about is cycle of violence, murder, the urgent need to fix the demonstrably unfixable.

Look, I understand you're talking about appearences here. So let's talk about not taking him out. What kind of appearnces does that give, do you suppose? So, because this guy's a terrorist in a wheelchair, as opposed to simply a terrorist, he gets a pass on what he does?

Doesn't seem like the image I'd like spread.

"Comment on the missile strike that killed Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin"

Good Shot.

Thanks Bithead.

I didn't know that "we" took him out. I thought the Israelis did it. If Hamas were a football team, you letter would be on the locker room wall.

“Just the murder of an inconvenient old man in a wheelchair coming out of prayers. It gives Europe another chance at condemnation.”

The hell with the feelings of the Old Europeans. They deserve nothing more than a pat on the head and told to go their rooms. Adults have got things to take care of and don’t have time for immature children. Their appeasement of Adolph Hitler lead to WWII. The more recent rear end licking of Yasser Arafat has caused countless deaths.

“It makes it harder for the investigations of Arafat's spending of Euros to get any traction.”

The liberal dominated American and Europeans media and intellectual institutions could less about investigating Arafat. They have only one real goal: the destruction of President Bush and his allies.

“Revenge may taste better cold, but it's more palatable to others when eaten warm.”

This was not primarily an act of revenge---but one of well thought out prudence. The Israels have probably saved the lives of many people. On top of that, it sends a clear message to the militants that they may be next.

I didn't know that "we" took him out. I thought the Israelis did it.

In this conyext, 'we' is 'the west'.

I wonder why it took them so long. Getting rid of the head of a terrorist organization is never a bad thing, and this one is particularly good given his ruthlessness in an unholy strategy of killing any innocent civilian available.

Now if only Israel can find a way to balance their fight against the terrorist with a way to give hope to the rest of Palestinians then peace might actually have a chance. Until that happens there will just be another terrorist leader for Israel to kill tomorrow while the nation lives under siege.

Rich:

Got any ideas? I will give my one and only. Set up decent permanent housing for the people in the refugee camps. Those camps were established by UN in 1948! Of course the folks in those camps are irritable, and want a "Right of Return".

"Set up decent permanent housing for the people in the refugee camps."

Great idea, but that's all it is. The terrorist infrastructure would tear them down as you build them, and bomb the innocent workers all the while.
If peace isn't on their terms alone, they have lost. They don't want their people to have a better life unless it is on top of the bodies of their targets.

The 'camps' you mention are pretty permanent, they look pretty much like other middle eastern cities. Why is it only the palestinians demand the right of return, other refugees seem to be assimilated or figure out how to get on with their lives. It seems as if the palestinians have been let down by their arab/muslim brothers, maybe if Jordan or Lebanon or Syria would let the palestinians become citizens they would not have to claim a right of return.

Just a thought.

A.P.
Those camps were established by Egypt and Jordan on their own soil (gaza & W. bank) in '48. Egypt and Jordan refused to let the refugees assimilate or move from the camps. The 6 day war in '67 brought the camps under Israeli control.

Egypt and Jordan are just as responsible as Israel, if not more so, for the situation that exists there today.

AM...what possible relevance is there to the fact that he was "an old man in a wheelchair coming out of prayers?" Do you think that age, disability, and religion should be allowed to serve as shields for those who direct terrorism?

And why is this "murder?" Would it have also been "murder," in your view, if the RAF had managed to drop a bomb on Hitler's head?

The UN has charge of the camps. The simple mindboggling assininity of the situation is best defined by the following link:

http://www.un.org/unrwa/photos/exhibition/index.html

Don't know that one room concrete huts qualifies as public housing that does notrequire reform, Bart...

David Foster:

Consider the following out of the NYT article to which our host links:

The Israeli weapons punctured the pavement of the street where Sheik Yassin, a quadriplegic, was being escorted home after dawn prayers. Blood spattered the walls of surrounding buildings. "I could not recognize the sheik, only his wheelchair," said one witness, Maher al-Beek.

That's powerful stuff, even when you realize that you just nailed a fellow who could care less about the Jewish women and children he has killed and maimed. It allows those who were just a few days ago under domestic criticism for supporting Arafat to bounce up and down and complain about the Israelis.

This may be just -- though my religion says it is not. But it is most certainly unwise.

The brutal murder of this defenceless old man is a calculated piece of barbarity and an act unbecoming of a nation that purports to be civilised.

As such, I applaud it.

I have no problem with killing this bastard, but I question whether it really accomplishes anything. It doesn't seem to take a lot of organization to conduct suicide bombings so I don't see how taking this guy out is really going to affect the terrorists. It seems to me that this is too limited to do anything but inflame the situation, while anything that would be brutal enough to effect the terrorists' calculations would be politically unacceptable. I don't pretend to have a solution, but this doesn't seem to be it.

At the very least it will serve pour l'encourage les autres.

"At the very least it will serve pour l'encourage les autres."

At the risk of sounding unlettered, I don't speak French, so what does this mean?

Read something interesting over at NR Online, which is that this is connected with the potential pullout from Gaza. If the Israelis want to get out, they can't make the same mistake they did when pulling out of southern Lebanon, which made them look as if they were retreating before a terrorist enemy, and may have had a lot to do with precipitating the latest round of conflict. As a result, what the IDF first needs to do is clear out as much of the Hamas infrastructure in Gaza as possible. If that's correct, getting Yassin was just the first salvo. It'll get a lot bloodier.

If Sharon is _really_ pulling out of Gaza (and some parts of the West Bank to follow), the pullout has to be made from a position of strength. Lebanon's lessons are hard-learned. So the more aggressive the IDF is in Gaza, the more likely it is that the proposed withdrawal behind the barrier will happen. Rantisi next!

MWS: Assassinations like this one are effective, though, for several reasons. By eliminating the leadership that coordinates the terrorist attacks, Israel forces a new leader to acquire and consolidate power. This impedes the execution of suicide bombings / terrorist attacks, and usually delays a few attacks. Furthermore, the assassinations instill significant fear into many of the HVTs and MVTs (high and medium value targets). These people can see through the religious BS fed to the foot-soldiers, and don't particularly want to die. These attacks deter these terrorists from operating in the open, and force them to take restrictive security measures. This degrades the effectualness of the terrorist groups.

In this case, Yassin's death may be even more beneficial for Israel. Despite the media buzz to the contrary, Islamic terrorist groups are not going to begin a devastating uprising due to this assassination. For one thing, these groups already launch myriad attacks against Israel every day. For another, Israel has sealed the border with the territories. Really - things are no different today, except the media is trying to play the story up. I've heard that Yassin has been instrumental in raising operating funds for Hamas, and motivating the "troops." As founder of the group, he also conceivably has some role in its operation. Taking him out negates many of the advantages he provides to Hamas.

Bithead:
No negotiations? C'mon, haven't you watched Besson's Classic?

224 INTERIOR AMBSDR ROOM

KORBEN DALLAS
Anyone else want to negotiate?

PURSER

Where'd he learn to negotiate like that?

226 INT. PRESIDENT'S OFFICE

GEN MUNRO Looks away

The President gives Munro a hard look.

PRESIDENT
I wonder...

Courtesy, The Luna Lounge

http://www.geocities.com/thelunalounge/site/sections/screenplays/

Lets look at this pragmatically. Is this going to affect Israel's status with the US? No. Especially not during an election year.
Is this going to affect Israel's status with Europe? Yes and no. Europe hasnt and wont do jack to help Israel make peace (such as pressuring the PLO to dismantle the terrorist infastructures, or even be accountable for the money they give them). They are going to condemn Israel basically no matter what, so what is Israel really losing? Nothing.
Is this going to affect Israels standing with the Palestinians. I dont know, can they possibly hate them any more? What do you do after youve bombed school buses?
Is this going to affect Israels relationship with terror organizations? You bet, for the better. Anyone who thinks there is any other option is mad. Look, say Hamas launches a bunch of half cocked revenge attacks. Good. That means they forgo well thought out well planned attacks they would have made in the future. This is a common misconception by the decisively challenged. Why would you think that someone willing ot strap explosives to their body and detonate a bunch of women and children is someone that can be placated? Make no mistake, its better to see the terrorists emotional, angry and afraid than to give them time to plan rationally and cooly. And plan they have, plan they will. They have consitantly used lulls and 'peace' periods to reequip and rearm. Dont let them. Bring the battle to Hamas everyday, every hour. They will crack. This isnt mission impossible. Nations have broken the backs of rebellions since the dawn of time. But it takes some ruthlessness with the bad guys. Sorry, sometimes it takes their crippled leadership being blown into bits of carbon and water to get that point across. Let me try to make this real simple (god forbid, black and white)
Bad guys need to die, people who target women and children are bad guys.

Doesn't the fact this is extra-judicial give anyone pause? Israel controls the territories and thus has jurisdiction. Shouldn't they at least make an effort to try this guy. In abstentia with a death sentence would at least give them cover.

Just because Palestinian terrorists ignore the rule of law, should Israel do the same?

>Comment on the missile strike that
>killed Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed
>Yassin

About flipping time.

So when does Arafat join him?

"...everyday, every hour. They will crack."

I rather like that Mark, You're better when you're angry.

Look, you're exactly right, and this is the big left/Right divide. They think it's about whether a thing can or can nopt be done, we think it's about whether or not a thing ought to be done.

It really is as black and white as you say.
Time to manufacture a a gross of 20 round 5.56mm strips in carboard boxes- 45 seconds Time to grow an angry disciple that is capable of sustained missions - at least 13 years, each. And you have to ensure they stay angry, bitter and unsophisticated that whole time.

My bet is with the good people at the Yitzhak plant in Nazareth.

cjb: Extra Judicial? No:

Here is what happened:

Yassin the sheik made a great feast to a thousand of his henchmen, and drank tea before the thousand. They drank tea, and praised the donors of gold, and of AK47s, of rockets, of dynamite, of C4, and of nails. In the same hour came forth fingers of a man's hand, and wrote upon the pilaster of the wall of the sheik's palace: and the sheik saw the part of the hand that wrote. Then the sheik's countenance was changed, and his thoughts troubled him, so that the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another. The sheik cried aloud to bring in the wise men. And the sheik spoke, and said to the wise men of Gaza, Whosoever shall read this writing, and show me the interpretation thereof, shall have a chain of gold about his neck. Then came in all the sheik's wise men: but they could not read the writing, nor make known to the sheik the interpretation thereof. Then was sheik Yassin greatly troubled, and his countenance was changed in him, and his henchmen were astonished. Finally one of the henchmen said, I think that is Hebrew and Shin Bet is behind this. So they called Shin Bet HQ, and the Duty officer named Daniel answered the phone, and he read the writing and interpreted it to them.

And this is the writing that was written, MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN.

This is the interpretation of the thing: MENE; God hath numbered thy sheikdom, and finished it.
TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.
PERES; Thy sheikdom is divided, and given to the IDF and the IAF.
And then a missle came out of the sky and blew the sheik straight to the bottom pit of hell.

Extra Judicial? No. It Doesn't get any more judicial than that.

MWS:

The British Admiralty sent Admiral John Byng in 1756 to prevent the French from taking Minorca, Byng arrived when the island was already under siege and, after an indecisive naval engagement, withdrew without relieving the siege. Byng was court-martialed and executed for "failure to do his utmost." This brought charges that he had been used as a scapegoat for ministerial failure. On his tombstone it says "bravery and loyalty were insufficient securities for the life and honour of a naval officer."

French author Francois Marie Arouet (1694 - 1778, "Voltaire") had his fictional character Candide witness such a hanging in the eponymous novel and remark:

"Dans ce pay-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres."
"In this country it is good to kill an admiral from time to time, to encourage the others."

Two criticisms. Two suggestions.
Criticism 1)Too quick
2)Way too painless

Suggestions 1)grave should have been handicap accessible 2) They should have hit the f@#$ing funeral as well

Those of you who want to die for Allah, come to us, we will assist you.

This was not primarily an act of revenge---but one of well thought out prudence. The Israels have probably saved the lives of many people

A number of people disagree with this assessment, including the Interior Minister of Israel, who I might respectfully suggest, knows more about the subject than anyone on this message board (particularly those posters who don't appear to know the difference between the PLO and Hamas)

When Israel assassinated the leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in 2001, a few weeks later PFLP members avenged the killing by assassinating an Israeli cabinet Minister, Rehavam Ze'evi. That's the precedent that comes to mind now. Besides the inevitable next bombing in a restaurant or bus, I believe that Hamas will try to avenge Yassin's killing by targeting a prominent Israeli leader, such as a cabinet Minister or perhaps a high profile religious leader such as the Shas party's Rabbi Ovadia Yosef.

Looks like you called it, Buehner...

"[Israel to target all Hamas leadership
Army chief also hints Arafat could be next;

MSNBC News Services
Updated: 7:24 a.m. ET March 23, 2004GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Israel will try to kill the entire leadership of Hamas without waiting for another attack by the militant group, security sources said Tuesday, citing a decision made by Israeli security chiefs following the assassination of Hamas’ founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin. Israel's army chief also suggested that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah would eventually be assassinated.]"

Oops, Sorry...Protocol: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4575552/

Dsquared-

First off, he's not the "Interior Minister of Isreal"

[Israeli media reported Tuesday that Avi Dichter, the director of Israel’s Shin Bet internal security service, had opposed Monday’s airstrike.]

And regardless, he (and you) seem to be the one's who with, respect, don't know as mucj about statecraft as other posters on this board, less still the citizens of that counntry. To wit...

"[Poll shows Israeli support for assassination

The assassination, which killed seven other people, received large support in Israel, despite the belief that it will spark more violence. The Yediot Ahronot daily published a poll showing 60 percent of Israelis that killing Yassin was the right thing to do, while 32 percent thought it was wrong.]"

(From the same article I posted the link to, above)

Which is all the more remarkable (yet, not surprising to conservatives) given this quote from the same article...

“[No one in the system, not even Sharon, believes that the assassination of the sheik will reduce the scope of terror. There is no strategy here: just bitter frustration and mounting difficulty to look the voters in the eye,” wrote Yediot columnist Nahum Barnea.]"

Really, Miss Barnea? Which voters? the 32%? And since when is 'No one' a synonym for 60%???

"Besides the inevitable next bombing in a restaurant or bus"

Ah, and there lies the rub. You are more right than you know when you say inevitable. Do you think Hamas doesnt bomb on a given day out of kindness? That they dont assassinate Israeli leaders to avoid 'provocation'? No, the only reason Hamas isnt bombing on a particular day is because they arent as prepared as theyd like. That being said, any time their hand is forced and they bomb when they normally wouldnt, it isnt because they were holding back out of good conscience, its because they launched a premature attack, which by its nature is less likely to succeed. How is this a bad thing?

While I won't shed a tear for him or anything he represents, it seems like in this situation a slightly more sophisticated solution was in order.
Yassin's death will increase terrorism against Israeli civilians in the short, middle and long terms without a doubt; he was at most a figurehead. After these attacks, Sharon's government will be much more unwilling to make concessions to more "legitimate" Palestinian groups, which at this point basically brings any peace process to a standstill until he pulls back to the 67 lines. I'm not sure what kind of solution this was supposed to be. What did it pragmatically accomplish for Israeli security?

Israel is not limiting itself to just killing Hamas leaders:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/nm/20040323/wl_nm/mideast_dc

"JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel said all Palestinian militant leaders were "in its sights" Tuesday, one day after killing Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin in an attack that provoked vows of bloody revenge.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) and top aides approved the order to target all senior militants after the wheelchair-bound cleric was assassinated in a missile strike outside a Gaza mosque Monday, security sources said.

"Everyone is in our sights," Internal Security Minister Tsahi Hanegbi told reporters. "There is no immunity to anyone."

Israel's army chief hinted that Palestinian President Yasser Arafat (news - web sites) and Lebanese Hizbollah guerrilla leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah could end up on the hit list, though security sources said there was no immediate plan to kill either."

Well, I must say I'm a bit disappointed at Washington's public reaction. Our goverment should be supporting fully this action by Israel; If taking out the leadership of the group responsible to the murder of Civilians... ala 9/11, etc, etc, etc, is a valid action...(and I think it is) how is it LESS vlaid when Israel who unarguably has suffered more and longer, does the same thing?

Another point; We're supposed to be fighting AQ.

"DUBAI (Reuters) - An Islamist web site published a statement Monday purporting to come from an al Qaeda-linked group vowing revenge on the United States and its allies over Israel's assassination of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.'We tell Palestinians that Sheikh Yassin's blood was not spilled in vain and call on all legions of Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades to avenge him by attacking the tyrant of the age, America, and its allies,' said the statement by Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigade carried by the al Ansar forum Web Site. The group, which aligns itself to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network, had claimed this month's train bombings in Spain. There was no means of verifying the statement. "

Anyone have any further questions about the connections between the PLO/Hamas, and al Qaeda, and how valid a target Yassin was?

Final point;
Belmont Club posted a bit yesterday that I thought brilliant; it makes concreate a direction I'd been leaning toward for some time, without putting it in words.

,i>"September 11 proved that terrorism could not be contained. It had to be finished. A prescient European foreign policy would have realized on September 12 that this conflict structure would inevitably lead to a widening war, one that would engulf Europe's own borders. But it did not grasp the implications of the struggle in time. It is now terribly vulnerable to the tides of conflict that lap against its frontiers."

...

"Neither the man commuting to work in Central Madrid nor the peace marchers in costume on Market Street can escape being combatants. Leftist sympathies, whether in Israel, America or Europe will prove no armor against car bomb fragments. War was Osama Bin Laden's goal in attacking the United States on September 11. He hoped to force America into fruitless but ineffectual reprisals against the Islamic world, then offer a hudna at intervals while he prepared his next blow. George Bush's counterstroke, which history will either judge as an act of supreme folly or genius, was to go beyond Afghanistan into Iraq. In a worthy riposte to Osama's, he escalated the struggle to the point where it was mutually mortal. If the fall of the Twin Towers was a gauntlet in America's face, the fall of Baghdad was a glove shoved down the Islamist's throat. Both Bin Laden and Bush have made compromise impossible. If the jihadis believed they could control the tempo of the conflict they were misinformed; American forces in the Arab heartland have forced a zugzwang to compel the game to the bitter end.

Yassin's assasination serves the same purpose. Israel's main problem was to escape the cycle of murder and negotiation that was slowly bleeding it to death. No matter how horribly Israel was attacked it was always expected to return, in an attitude of abjection, to the negotiating table.

The Jihadis learned that any Israeli counteroffensive could be aborted by throwing the prospect of further talks into its path. Israel's superiority on the battlefield would be nullified because it would always be restrained by the "Peace Process", a misnomer if ever there was one. But the operation against Yassin reverses the dynamic."

It's called "The Results of Growing a Spine-101"
Many, it seems could use a refresher course.

speaking of looking at this situation in pragmatic terms, before you call for more Israeli extra-judicial killings perhaps everyone should consider the effect Israel's recent moves are having on US soldiers?

http://washingtontimes.com/world/20040323-121021-7275r.htm

Israel's killing of Yassin puts U.S. in line of fire

By David R. Sands
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Arab rage at Israel's assassination of the Hamas founder quickly spilled into Iraq yesterday, signaling that the killing of the Palestinian militant could undermine U.S. policies and interests across the region.
Protesters at two demonstrations against the U.S.-led coalition — one in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul and the other in the southern city of Basra — chanted in support of Sheik Ahmed Yassin.
"Do not worry, Palestine. Iraq will avenge the assassination of Sheik Yassin," protesters in Mosul chanted.

Sharon has done nothing but complicate matters for us in Iraq. Nice going.

BT;

Ah.
So, is the solution then, is to allow the terrorists to destroy Israel?

If that solution seems unacceptable to you, then congrats.... it should. But be prepared for anyone saying the destruction of Israel is not an option, to become a TARGET.

That's the choice before us, I think.

"Yassin's death will increase terrorism against Israeli civilians in the short, middle and long terms without a doubt"

There is _great_ doubt. Increasing terrorism in the short term will very likely decrease it in the middle and long terms. For the reasons I stated above. Whatsmore if this leads to the destruction of Hamas as a political and terrorist force it may well pave the way for a solution. No solution can exist when perhaps the most powerful faction in the territories (eclipsing even the PLO by all indications) is Hamas, sworn to drive Israel into the sea.

"perhaps everyone should consider the effect Israel's recent moves are having on US soldiers?"

You dont get it. That is a _good_ thing. Its what we want. Jihadis going out and shooting it out with GIs equals dead Jihadis. Jihadis sitting in basements designing bombings equals dead civilians and probably GIs.

For a bunch of (maybe) intellectuals that do not live in Israel or Palistine (or likely the "real" world at all ["yes I have"]), ...you "all" certainly are full of vicious verbal violence enough in your response to an-"other" being killed by a missle (for heaven's sake! a missle? Not a double tap even?) and then to each other; sounds more like talk-hate off Clear Channel than something appropriate to discourse on this particular site. If I wanted to read or listen to this kind of argument I can find it in any bar any night in the USA. or Michael Savage all week.
CBH

Then maybe you should consider doing that.

God knows what kind of genteel discourse you are used to when discussing murderous thugs being offed. Gee, I hope our rabid hate speech hasnt pushed some normally placid Hamas candystriper into strapping a bomb to his body and walking into a pre-school. God knows it would be all our fault.

The point was this: When our discourse over an-"other's" death, no matter who, is as ugly as it is here we are no better. Indeed, chat rooms are now sounding more and more like phone courage (blah blah blah); or serial e-mailers; or to put it another way, ...when have you, or any of you for that matter, looked down the barrel of a gun? Nobody who has served in combet wants war (unless there is no other choice on one's own soil.) no one who has had to kill, even in war, sees anyone's death the way it is being talked about here. This site ought to have been more dialectic than the Rush Limbaugh Show... But, my mistake, as always, I have misunderstood my mostly American counterparts who are always so courageous at the key board!
Craig B Hulet?

No, Craig, the point was... and this is the kindest context I can take you comments in....you're missing the point that our response is tied directly to who it is we're dealing with.

Else, you're a supporter of these viewpoints:?

http://users.lmi.net/zombie/sf_rally_march_20_2004/

"When our discourse over an-"other's" death, no matter who, is as ugly as it is here we are no better"

So when John Kerry says he wants to put a gun to OBLs head, that would be along those lines? He becomes no better?

Nobody spoke of Kerry, ... (and Kerry is just blowin' election year smoke too, ...that is, if he ever actually said that.) I spoke of you: and one wonders if you could "pull the trigger" on my grandmother's head, given as trigger-happy as you "pretend"; as robust as your language "pretends" on a chat room; as tough-a-guy as you like to "pretend" and sound(off)? We can all surmise you are an armchair warrior, too much TV; having never done, been, nor anything else in the categories mentioned earlier.

Frankly, I wish I had not written at all, I was simply repulsed that this kind of "crap," to use a colloquialism more atuned to your blather, is on "Drezner's" site? That was all. I steer clear of such a cowardly discourse, as I know you do not really mean it all, "at all"; you are just blowin' smoke because of your self-inflicted fears. Even though nothing has happened to you (you see we can tell), but then, that is why Oprah and Springer are so well-liked.
Craig B Hulet?

Actully; I shall stay off "Drezner's" site forthwith as I am much too afraid to trade clever jibes with one so smart -- way too smart for me.
_______________________________________
Soren Kierkegaard was right about the effects of the printing press; he would say it again regarding the Internet chat rooms.

"Nobody spoke of Kerry"
I did. I asked you if you found his tone repulsive when he said that. The inquiry seems to have disjointed your famous equilibrium. Try some breathing exercises.

"We can all surmise you are an armchair warrior, too much TV; having never done, been, nor anything else in the categories mentioned earlier."

You can surmise whatever you like. We can assume from your own writing that you are a pompous ass with a superiority complex.

"Frankly, I wish I had not written at all"
I doubt you'll get much argument about that. You still havent managed to so much as touch the substance of the debate, so aghast are you at the tone.

"Actully; I shall stay off "Drezner's" site forthwith as I am much too afraid to trade clever jibes with one so smart -- way too smart for me."

As you will.

"Soren Kierkegaard was right about the effects of the printing press; he would say it again regarding the Internet chat rooms. "

Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego - Doc Holliday

M. Hulet:

I believe I understand you as saying that when we engage in speech that you believe is hate speech, we are no better than Mr.Yassin.

Um,that's about as bogus a moral equivalency as I've seen. Let me explain the difference for you

When Mark Buehner takes a moment from his coffee (or gin, if you prefer) to write that he would prefer jihadis (or any other Other) who want him dead to die, all he really accomplishes is to persuade a few folks that he's right or wrong, and takes up a tiny bit of Mr. Drezner's bandwidth.

When the late Sheik Yassin discussed over tea and prayers those members of his "Other" he preferred to be deceased,the usual result was a little blood, some incidental dismemberments, a few more widows and orphans, and, at the very least, a dead Palestinian youth whose confusion was cruelly exploited.

It's fun to talk of "Others" and Kierkegaard, to show that you at least took a philosophy course, or read a book that you don't want to admit bored the tar out of you. But please do not pretend you are a serious social critic.

Serious critics you aren't; just serious about your own views: What did I mean by "Soren Kierkegaard was right about the effects of the printing press; he would say it again regarding the Internet chat rooms. " Awaiting your remarks...." Not in the least boring.

Killing any old guy in a wheelchair with a 2.75 rocket (two of them) coming out of a Mosque... my God that took almost as much courage as you all pretending you give a damn.

I've been a serious critic for thirty years after my return from Vietnam 1969-1970 101st Airborne, where we lost my unit's colors... again, your armchair warrior beer-hall boasting about what "others" should do, did, or ought to do about killing "others," is just phone courage still.

Heah! I got it. Why do you not enlist? Bush and Kerry both want two more Dividions to go to Iraq in the next two years.

Craig, I salute your service, but you dont know a damn thing about me. You may be a hero at Indymedia and the DU, but that doesnt make your opinion better than anyone elses round these parts. If you want to be cowtowed to, go back there. I expect theres enough hatespeach to go around there as well.
War is a terrible thing. But there are worse things. You write passionately about the suffering of the Vietnam vets and there families, and its to your credit. But dont forget about the perhaps 160,000 south Vietnamese who were murdered by the communists after we abandoned them. Or the hundreds of thousands forced into labor camps, or turned into refugees.
The same can be said for Iraq. If half a million bodies Hussein put in the ground doesnt give you pause, I dont know what will. Blame corperate America all you want. Halliburton can become richer than God for all I care, if it shuts down Husseins torture rooms, rape rooms, and childrens prisons. We have a larger stake in the world. Simply not causing evil isnt a good in itself. Ignoring evil can be just as bad.

Boortz this morning"

Thanks to James Taranto's Opinion Journal column, we can now take a look at the Covenant of the Hamas. This document was issued on August 18, 1988. It is the founding document of Hamas. Cair calls Yassin an "Islamic religious leader?" Yeah .. the leader of Hamas.

Let's take a look at a few excerpts from the Covenant of the Hamas

Article 7: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him."

Article 13: "So-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement ... There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad [holy war]."

Now just what was it that CAIR said in their statement on the death of Ahmed Yassin? Oh year ... "The international community must now take concrete steps to help protect the Palestinian people against such wanton Israeli violence." Read those bits from the founding document of Hamas ... and then spend a few of your precious moments thinking about how idiotic it is for CAIR to be imploring the international community to talk about "wanton Israeli violence." Didn't we read something about "fight Jews and kill them" and "there is a Jew hiding be hind me, come and kill him"? And the world needs to protect these goons from those bad, bad Israelis?

He's right, of course. At what point do we stop weeping about how the west is the agreessor, and start dealing with the fact that we are under unrelentling attack by an aggressor that doesn't WANT peace?? As I pointed out in a quote I posted here yesterday, Leftist sympathies, singing koombyah and peace symbols, whether in Israel, America or Europe will prove no armor against car bomb fragments. Their purposes in the 'peace' proces has been shown over time to be nothing more than an effort to gain time to mount further attacks against us, and to gain followers.

The killing of Yassin is a good step toward limiting that effect, but will only be flly effective if our own left will learn the facts.I fear they have neither the brains nor the guts for them.

Israelis picked up a 12 year old wearing an explosive belt today. Simple question, does a group willing to strap explosives to a pre-teen really need incentives to do there evil? Or are they going to do it no matter what and its best to kill them if you can?

Palestinians are innocents and you know this!
George

does craig hulet have anything of value to say? it seems that he is working for the world federalist,but it is to tell with his ranting and raving

does craig hulet have anything of value to say? it seems that he is working for the world federalist,but it is to tell with his ranting and raving