My mauseoleum has chiseled granite too: "Teetered on the brink of mediocrity"

Please view this CBS news video to see the true nature of Jews:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev6ojm62qwA

Comment 3 (soon to be) removed by moderator (I hope).

He has a daughter named Rolanda and a son named Roland II (versus the more standard Roland Jr. -- is that just a recent fad?)

#5 is a racist.

- LaRolanda

#6 is one of my clients.

-AAR

hilarious! what a nut this guy is. A nut appointed by a dope. Illinois is creeping up on New Jersey for most corrupt politicians status.

How can he blaze trails after shooting himself in the leg? What a trooper he is. Inspiration to 190!

This would never happen in Texas.

HoustonJim

@4 - What 3 wrote is over the top and anti-semitic, but you can't really argue with the content of the video he/she posted. It's a CBS story (that's right, main stream media) that exposes the really ugly side of the Israeli aggression against Gaza--i.e. dropping bombs on children playing on a rooftop. Shame on Israel....

Illinois passed NJ long ago for the most corrupt state award-four of our last eight governors have gone (or will be going) to jail. And yet we fooled the country into putting our senator into the oval office.

# 11 you're an idiot and an apologist for terrorists. Israel handed over control of Gaza and kicked out its own settlers hoping for peace. Hamas broke the ceasefire by INTENTIONALLY targeting civilians with rockets. Now Israel is defending itself, as it has a right to do under Article 51 of the UN convention. Civilians are being killed (unintentionally) because Hamas is using women and children to shield its military operations. If you sympathize so much, maybe you should travel to Gaza? We don't need you here.

Letter of the law: http://tinyurl.com/8qaaqx

That seems to say that BlogJog could do it and Burris could accept it. Did you read something different Kash?

12, did Illinois also fool some law school into admitting you? That would seem to be the conclusion from your logic.

#13 = ham hater

Obama is a communist, America was douped.

More like TTTrailblazer.

all the legal analysis I've see suggest that Burris can accept and that perhaps even the Senate can't refuse him (i.e. based on past SCOTUS precedent, the Senate can't say no).

Admitted, however, I've only read about 3 or 4 analyzes of this and have not done my own additional research.

13 - Israel has the most sophisticated weapons systems in the world. Using this sophisticated technology, there's no doubt that the Israeli pilot who dropped bombs on that rooftop could clearly see that little children were playing there. If you can't see the inhumanity in this...well, it seems the only idiot/apologist for terrorists here is YOU.

-11

"Burris doesn't seem to quite have the letter or the spirit of the law on his side." This bit of snark is completely wrong. Under Illinois law, Governor Blagojevich has the power and duty to appoint an individual to serve the remainder of President-Elect Obama's senate term. Some members of the Illinois legislature advocated stripping Governor B of that power after his arrest and scheduling a special election to fill the seat, but the Democrats blocked that move because of concerns that a Republican might win the special election. In addition, the US Supreme Court ruled in the case of Congressman Adam Clayton Powell that Congress could not block Powell from his seat as long as he met Constitutional requirements for eligibility. It seems therefore that the law, in letter and spirit, is more on Mr. Burris' side than it is on Harry Reid's.

Children have no business playing on top of buildings. I blame the kids.

"Burris doesn't seem to quite have the letter or the spirit of the law on his side." This bit of snark is wrong. Under Illinois law, Governor Blagojevich has the power and duty to appoint an individual to serve the remainder of President-Elect Obama's senate term. Some members of the Illinois legislature advocated stripping Governor B of that power after his arrest and scheduling a special election to fill the seat, but the Democrats blocked that move because of concerns that a Republican might win the special election. In addition, the US Supreme Court ruled in the case of Congressman Adam Clayton Powell that Congress could not block Powell from his seat as long as he met the Constitutional requirements for eligibility. It seems therefore that the law, in letter and spirit, is more on Mr. Burris' side than it is on Harry Reid's.

"Burris doesn't seem to quite have the letter or the spirit of the law on his side." This bit of snark is wrong. Under Illinois law, Governor Blagojevich has the power and duty to appoint an individual to serve the remainder of President-Elect Obama's senate term. Some members of the Illinois legislature advocated stripping Governor B of that power after his arrest and scheduling a special election to fill the seat, but the Democrats blocked that move because of concerns that a Republican might win the special election. In addition, the US Supreme Court ruled in the case of Congressman Adam Clayton Powell that Congress could not block Powell from his seat as long as he met the Constitutional requirements for eligibility. It seems therefore that the law, in letter and spirit, is more on Mr. Burris' side than it is on Harry Reid's.

13-
How can Hamas be the one to break the truce, when it was Israel who imosed a blockade after Hamas won democratic elections? Israel STILL enagged in military incursions into gaza, and cut them off from the rest of the world.

That is when hamas started shooting rockets into Israel in protest.

You are a apoligist for genocidal regimines and may your family suffer the same fate as the innocent families in Gaza.

(I only wish i could spit at you)

11 - The Hamas terrorists are the ones responsible for the "inhumanity." They knew they were subjecting their civilian population to this horror when they intentionally broke the ceasefire. Now they must pay the price for their actions.

9-11 was our fault too right?

13

Gaza = TTT

#11 - let's see some critical thinking, you f**king troll. The clip featured the voice of a Norwegian doctor voluteering at one hospital in Gaza. He might be an expert at shoveling your abdomen back up your ass after its blown out by a Katyusha rocket, but what does he know out warfare and politics? Based on the the amount of civilian casualties he has seen at his one shithole hospital and the lack of "militant" casualties, he concludes that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians. Now - do you really believe that? If Israel really wanted to target civilians, I think you would see a lot more civilian dead. C'mon - show some sense.
I thought lawyers were supposed to try to put things into context and see the bigger picture. That Norwegian doctor has no firsthand information on where these civilian casualties came from - it's the Hamas donkey cart ambulance drivers that tell him their version, and he eats it up and regurgitates it to some blond CBS bimbo anchoring their internet news segments.
Listen - no one wants to see civilians killed (except Hamas.) But if Hamas stores weapons in the basement of your mosque or elementary school - who is to blame for the deaths when an Israeli missile sends them all to hell?
Those kids on the front page of CNN could have come from anywhere. CNN writes that the senior Hamas commander was killed along with 7 family members in a airstrike, including his 4 wives and some kids. If Osama bin Laden was killed with some of his kids by a cruise missile - just how much sympathy can you work up?

#11 - let's see some critical thinking, you f**king troll. The clip featured the voice of a Norwegian doctor voluteering at one hospital in Gaza. He might be an expert at shoveling your abdomen back up your ass after its blown out by a Katyusha rocket, but what does he know out warfare and politics? Based on the the amount of civilian casualties he has seen at his one shithole hospital and the lack of "militant" casualties, he concludes that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians. Now - do you really believe that? If Israel really wanted to target civilians, I think you would see a lot more civilian dead. C'mon - show some sense.
I thought lawyers were supposed to try to put things into context and see the bigger picture. That Norwegian doctor has no firsthand information on where these civilian casualties came from - it's the Hamas donkey cart ambulance drivers that tell him their version, and he eats it up and regurgitates it to some blond CBS bimbo anchoring their internet news segments.
Listen - no one wants to see civilians killed (except Hamas.) But if Hamas stores weapons in the basement of your mosque or elementary school - who is to blame for the deaths when an Israeli missile sends them all to hell?
Those kids on the front page of CNN could have come from anywhere. CNN writes that the senior Hamas commander was killed along with 7 family members in a airstrike, including his 4 wives and some kids. If Osama bin Laden was killed with some of his kids by a cruise missile - just how much sympathy can you work up?

#11 - let's see some critical thinking, you f**king troll. The clip featured the voice of a Norwegian doctor voluteering at one hospital in Gaza. He might be an expert at shoveling your abdomen back up your ass after its blown out by a Katyusha rocket, but what does he know out warfare and politics? Based on the the amount of civilian casualties he has seen at his one shithole hospital and the lack of "militant" casualties, he concludes that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians. Now - do you really believe that? If Israel really wanted to target civilians, I think you would see a lot more civilian dead. C'mon - show some sense.
I thought lawyers were supposed to try to put things into context and see the bigger picture. That Norwegian doctor has no firsthand information on where these civilian casualties came from - it's the Hamas donkey cart ambulance drivers that tell him their version, and he eats it up and regurgitates it to some blond CBS bimbo anchoring their internet news segments.
Listen - no one wants to see civilians killed (except Hamas.) But if Hamas stores weapons in the basement of your mosque or elementary school - who is to blame for the deaths when an Israeli missile sends them all to hell?
Those kids on the front page of CNN could have come from anywhere. CNN writes that the senior Hamas commander was killed along with 7 family members in a airstrike, including his 4 wives and some kids. If Osama bin Laden was killed with some of his kids by a cruise missile - just how much sympathy can you work up?

#11 - let's see some critical thinking, you f**king troll. The clip featured the voice of a Norwegian doctor voluteering at one hospital in Gaza. He might be an expert at shoveling your abdomen back up your ass after its blown out by a Katyusha rocket, but what does he know out warfare and politics? Based on the the amount of civilian casualties he has seen at his one shithole hospital and the lack of "militant" casualties, he concludes that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians. Now - do you really believe that? If Israel really wanted to target civilians, I think you would see a lot more civilian dead. C'mon - show some sense.
I thought lawyers were supposed to try to put things into context and see the bigger picture. That Norwegian doctor has no firsthand information on where these civilian casualties came from - it's the Hamas donkey cart ambulance drivers that tell him their version, and he eats it up and regurgitates it to some blond CBS bimbo anchoring their internet news segments.
Listen - no one wants to see civilians killed (except Hamas.) But if Hamas stores weapons in the basement of your mosque or elementary school - who is to blame for the deaths when an Israeli missile sends them all to hell?
Those kids on the front page of CNN could have come from anywhere. CNN writes that the senior Hamas commander was killed along with 7 family members in a airstrike, including his 4 wives and some kids. If Osama bin Laden was killed with some of his kids by a cruise missile - just how much sympathy can you work up?

20, perhaps Hamas, as the governing authority in Gaza, should not let children "play" on the rooftops of weapons depots or caches. OR better yet, not have weapons depots mixed in with civilian areas in the first place.
Israel already provide ample warning to people who live in or near the depots. That they refuse to leave and prefer to be martyred is their own concern.

I am not comfortable sitting on this blog with all of these Araby type peoples. They are making me nervous.

25 - Better yet, throw a pair of shoes at that moron!

25 -- I wish I could throw my shoe at you. But your pathetic ignorance is your punishment.

13

25, ah yes, because before the 2006 blockade, Hamas never shot rockets into Israel. Riiight. I think you stepped into the wrong alternate reality, because in our world these rocket attacks started in 2001.

Maybe the blockade was imposed because Hamas has been shooting those rockets, and once in power was very likely expected to shoot even more rockets into Israel?

Hamas is intentionally covering their military targets with civilians. They known that they cannot make their targets hard enough to withstand an Israeli missle attack and they can't hide them because Israel has the most sophisiticated surveillance and inteligence network in the work. Hamas has chosen create soft civilian shields because they cannot complete militarily. They chose this strategy and it is their fault that civilian casualties have been so high. The Israeli blockade of Gaza was not killing civilians. The rockets launched into Israel were the first actions to break the cease fire. If you look at what was agreed to the blockade did not breach the cease fire agreement. The rocket attacks on Israel did.

Burris has like a 50% chance of being confirmed. That's pretty awesome. If he has any brains at all, he'll turn this into a huge race issue. Why the hell doesn't the Senate have any other black members? Plus I never cared about Rod the God but I gotta hand it to our man, he knows how to stir the shit.

38, because those other black members either won higher office (and resigned early) or lost re-election.

The Israelis just bombed a Gaza school.

Keep in mind these are the people blaming Hamas for "not building schools."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/06/israeli-bombs-hit-un-scho_n_155497.html

25, last time I checked rocket fire is not a legitimate form of protest. It is an act of war. If you are going to shoot rockets and then hide your stockpiles among a civilian population you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Guys at my high school used to build hubristic tributes to their own greatness all the time. It was no big deal.

Hey guys,

I'm a Mexican and I'm dissatisfied with the Treaty of Guadaloupe Hidalgo. California belongs to Mexico. I plan to protest the US occupation of California by launching rocket attacks at San Diego civilians. Liberals will support me when the US military tries to stop my attacks, right? I'm entitled to shoot rockets whenever I'm unhappy with a political situation, right?

I'm with 22. Those kids are totally irresponsible. Dummies.

40 = GULCer trained suicide bomber

A " death mausoleum," Kash?

Redundant much, dear?

I blame the island of Cyprus for this mess. I also blame Jews for Jesus because they confuse everybody.

Evan Chisler

This is reminisent of a Bork situtation. The only way this can be "legal" is for Blago to fire the Lt. Gov. and appoint someone who will sign off on Burris. Until that happens, Burris is no more legal than he was before Blago announced him.

Of course, I have no idea if Blago can fire and appoint the Lt. Gov. Anyone?

This Norwegian doctor is also on record parroting the usual Hamas conspiracy tripe about how Israelis dragged women and children into buildings and then bombed the buildings. In fact, that is what Hamas is doing -- dragging women and children into their hideouts so they can claim civilians are targeted -- but the same brainwashed masses of Paestinians (you know, the ones that read newspapers every day that print stores about how palestinian kids are kidnapped by Israel, slaughtered and then ground up into food for Israeli kids in a modern day version of soylent green) actually believe that Israel is the root of all evil.

Hamas broke the cease fire by deliberately targeting civilians. Israel has responded by trying to wipe out Hamas, although those operations will necessarily have civilian casualties as well. The reaction of the international community (especially Europe) is a disgrace -- siding mostly with Hamas. Given Europe's less than stellar history when it comes to Jews, one wonders whether there is more than a little anti-Semitisim going on.

13, 35:

Osama? Is that you?

Burris "doesn't seem to quite have the letter or the spirit of the law on his side."? Did a lawyer write this? Everything I've read indicates that he does. Am I missing something? When the Governor appoints someone to a seat, that person is the Senator. The SOS has to certify but that is a purely ceremonial function. He has no discretion in the matter. The Senate has the power to block candidates pursuant to Article I, Section III, but that power is proscribed or limited by the constitution. And it's clear that power doesn't apply to Burris. His selection was legal and he meets all the other requirements, age, citizenship,etc. So someone explain to me how he doesn't have the "spirit"of the law on his side?

Also, we're going to cemeteries, photographing and criticizing people's eventual tombstones and their children's names now??? Give me a break and get a life.

43: Don't you dare put this on liberals. The terrorist apologists are anti-semites who support Hamas' stated goal of "DESTROYING ISRAEL."

That being said, I'm a liberal and I think Israel should do whatever they need to in order to survive. Maybe you should look beyond the mainstream media and recognize that Israel is portrayed as the aggressor when it is an island of sanity surrounded by ravening hordes of religious and anti-semetic zealots.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3651063,00.html

Hey 28-31, the comparison to Bin Laden is a reasonable one... except it ignores the underlying differences between the US and Israel. Bin Laden lashed out at the US simply out of hate for what it stands for, with no achievable goal or legitimate rationale. The Palestinians, on the other hand, have spent decades trying to get their homeland back, which was taken from them when Israel was created and when Israel forcibly expanded their borders. Imagine if, instead of the middle east, the zionists had carved out a chunk of your home country and then used force to take some more, would you be a terrorist if you opposed that?

That doesn't excuse Hamas shooting rockets after Israel had left, but it does set a pretty stark contrast against the Bin Laden comparison. These people have a plausible claim that Israel has historically been the bad guy. As you say, lawyers are supposed to put things in context and your context, while convenient for your argument, fails to see the reality of the world these Palestinians have lived in.

Yes, 51, you are missing something: two signatures are required for a legal appointment and Burris has but one. There's the "letter" of the law.

Burris is a self-aggrandizing asshole appointed by a shameless, swindling swine. There's the "spirit" of the law.

Got it now?

53, you do remember the history of how the Palestinians wound up occupying that "homeland" in the first place, right?

43: Only the first sentence was directed at you, the rest was directed at the terrorist apologists on this site.

How can we sleep when our beds are burning.......?!?

3 and 20- so what you are saying is that indiscriminately firing 2000 rockets over the past 4 years into Israel in hopes of killing as many civilians as possible is permissible and should not be countered with miltary action? Go live in Sderot for a while and tell us what you think then.
So easy to blame Israel for everything, right? The only reason that there aren't more casualties in Israel as a result of these rockets is because the Israeli gov't made it a priority to build shelters and install the latest technology to avoid civilian casualties. Meanwhile in the same timeframe Hamas has done no such thing because they know that an increased body count is beneficial for their cause. Which is exactly why they place women and children in harm's way even when Israel informs them of their targets. And you dare speak of a lack of humanity by Israel.

52/56, while you may be an Israel-supporting liberal, you may be aware that most of the anti-Israel pro-Hamas sentiment comes from the left, especially the European left and the "human rights" left (i.e., HRW, AI, etc), while conservatives almost universally support our democratic ally Israel and its right to national defense.
In other words, not all liberals are pro-Hamas, but almost all those who are pro-Hamas are liberal.

51 here.

You're wrong. It seems to me he has the "spirit" of the law on his side. He was selected by a duly elected governor pursuant to the ILL State constitution. The SOS does not have the constitutional right to refuse to sign appointments made by the people's elected representatives. It's a technicality. For the Secretary of the Senate to say that his appointment is incomplete because he's missing a signature from a ceremonial officer in ILL is total B.S and THAT is against the "spirit" of the law.

How would you feel if a US Prosecutor filed a criminal COMPLAINT against your Governor, which was totally false (not saying this one is but just exploring the issue) and because of that, you were denied representation in the US Senate because a ceremonial officer decided he rather watch tv than sign a document. Who is against the "spirit" of the law here? Burris is right. The law is on his side. Pure and simple. You can't hate it but it's the law.

"When the Governor appoints someone to a seat, that person is the Senator. The SOS has to certify but that is a purely ceremonial function. He has no discretion in the matter."

First, the Lt. Gov. of the state is the one who has to certify.

Second, it's funny how a "purely cermonial function" is still a legal prerequisite to a legal appointment. The Lt. Gov. has no discretion in the sense of being able to pick someone else, but his certification of any appointment is necessary and need not be provided--he has the discretion to withhold the certification so long as he remains Lt. Gov.

If Blago really wants Burris to be "legal," he'd better get a new Lt. Gov. who will bend to his inappropriate demand, or persuade the current one to do likewise.

59: or anti-semites who tend to be from the racist right. I merely point out that you can't lambast liberals for this, that's just trying to inflame the situation.

Hmmm....

I was excited to read this post because I expected the comments to mostly discuss the constitutional issues raised by Burris' appointment and the application of the Clayton decision, yet it's turned into a pissing match about Israel's campaingn to defend itself. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

51 here.

You're wrong. He was selected by a duly elected governor pursuant to the IL State constitution. The SOS does not have the constitutional right to refuse to sign appointments made by the people's elected representatives. It's a technicality. For the Secretary of the Senate to say that his appointment is incomplete because he's missing a signature from a ceremonial officer in IL is total B.S and THAT is against the "spirit" of the law.

How would you feel if a US Prosecutor filed a criminal COMPLAINT against your Governor, which was totally false (not saying this one is but just exploring the issue) and because of that, you were denied representation in the US Senate because a ceremonial officer decided he rather watch tv than sign a document. Who is against the "spirit" of the law here? What's the legal basis? There isn't even an indictment.

Burris is right. The law is on his side. Pure and simple. You can't hate it but it's the law.

And your mother is self-aggrandizing.

3 and 20- so what you are saying is that indiscriminately firing 2000 rockets over the past 4 years into Israel in hopes of killing as many civilians as possible is permissible and should not be countered with miltary action? Go live in Sderot for a while and tell us what you think then.
So easy to blame Israel for everything, right? The only reason that there aren't more casualties in Israel as a result of these rockets is because the Israeli gov't made it a priority to build shelters and install the latest technology to avoid civilian casualties. Meanwhile in the same timeframe Hamas has done no such thing because they know that an increased body count is beneficial for their cause. Which is exactly why they place women and children in harm's way even when Israel informs them of their targets. And you dare speak of a lack of humanity by Israel.

55, Surely you do not want blame the Palestinians today for the actions of their ancestors that occurred centuries ago? Would it be ok for the Native Americans to take back their home country too? At some point you have to establish a baseline for when land becomes "yours." 50 years ago seems like a short enough time that it has not yet changed hands... 500 does not.

But, again, I was just presenting a more accurate context, not arguing in favor of Palestinians destroying Israel.

51/60, you're an idiot. The SoS is irrelevant--the Lt. Gov. of Illinois has refused to sign off on the Gov's pick. There's a threshold issue right there--if both sign off on Burris, then we reach the question of whether the SoS can decide to not perform his "technicality" of a function.

If Burris really wants to, let him sue the SoS for a writ of mandamus--it worked SO WELL for Marburry.

Idiot.

53, yes you would be a terrorist if you engaged in terrorist activities to achieve your political ends, such as rocket attacks on civilians. If you engaged in legitimate non-violent activities to oppose foreign governments, then you are not a terrorist. You must be a 1L since you seem to be confusing how "terrorism" relates to the means and not to the ends.

If Mexicans attacked San Diego civilians with rockets, or American Indians attacked US cities with suicide bombs, then you're saying they're not terrorists? Ok whatever you say, dude.

The law is all about "technicalities," 64--in this case, there is a state constitutional provision that checks the governor's power to appoint senators. Period, end of story.

The law of Illinois says a senate appointment requires two signatures--not just the governor's say-so--and the Secretary of the Senate has no authority to seat someone not duly appointed. Burris cannot be seated by the SOS anymore than a random Illinois citizen that the SOS picked out of the phone book.

Your resort to adjectives--"ceremonial" and "total B.S."--betrays your lack of support. Try telling the Illinois Supreme Court and SCOTUS that they must issue writs of mandamus to the Lt. Gov and the SOS (respectively) because these technicalities are "total B.S."

I'm sure they'll instantly see your inescapable logic.

68 - nope, not a 1L. I won't speculate as to what you must be, but if you think the only legitimate way to defend your country is nonviolence then you are not in the mainstream. If Mexico forcibly annexed Texas, I very much doubt you'd be calling the partisans that would rise up "terrorists."

Damn, 69 just owned that guy.

51 back again.

I guess Erwin Chemerinsky is an idiot too:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chemerinsky6-2009jan06,0,3961155.story

67, I don't know where you are getting your facts but the Senate has already stated that the SOS signature is the reason why Burris' appointment is incomplete.

The Lt. Governor, the SOS, the Secretary of the Senate, these people are blocking an appointment based on "signatures" and it is Burris who is operating against the "spirit" of the law? Listen to yourself.

Cite me one sound legal basis for denying Blago the right to appoint besides the criminal complaint. What kind of precedent does this set? This gives every US Attorney in America the power to stop a Governor from exercising their constitutional power by filing a criminal complaint with no supporting evidence that can be rebutted.

70, so if Mexicans launch rockets at San Diego civilian targets, according to the pro-Hamas apologists like you that is not terrorism, right?

haha...Its only a matter of time before the palestinians get the upper hand...I love a great underdog story.

Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand?

Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand?

Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand?

Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand?

Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand?

69, my point is that Burris isn't the one operating against the spirit of the law. It's the people digging through the constitution trying to find technicalities and obscure reasons to block his appointment. My original point is that this sentence "Burris doesn't seem to quite have the letter or the spirit of the law on his side." is wrong.

Also, does any Gov. under federal investigation not have the power to appoint? Would state and federal officials be operating in the "spirit" of the law if they tried to block appointments made by Bill Ricardson for example?

Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand? Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand? Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand? Why are all these israeli-genocide/baby killing supporter ignoring the fact that the unabated israeli blockade precipitated the rocket attacks on israel?

Is it such an insurmountable truth that the only way to effectively deal with it is to act as if it does not exist?

Don’t blockade the palestinians to the point of sever poverty and death, and they wont shoot rockets. How hard can that be to understand?

62 -- get a clue. Those who are vocally opposing Israel's right to self defense are liberal activists. People gathering in Times Square and elsewhere to protest against Israel are liberal activists supported by liberal activist organizations.

And re: your statement that "anti-semites ... tend to be from the racist right." I won't bother to try to argue how naive a statement that is. But I'll offer a generalization of my own is much more relevant to this issue -- an anti-semite from "the racist right" probably hates Palestinians and Arabs just as much as he hates Jews. So the "anti-semite ... from the racist right" has no dog in this fight. So he's probably not cheering for, or defending, Hamas' firing of rockets into Israel.

- Not 59

73 - Why is everything so black and white with you people? I am neither pro-Hamas, nor an apologist, I just see that there are two sides to this issue. And no, your strawman argument obviously is not the one that I am presenting.

75-81, Hamas has been launching rocket attacks at Israel since 2001. The blockade started in 2006. So your causation reasoning, that the rocket attacks won't happen if there were no blockade, is a bit off, unless Hamas in 2001 perfected the ability to see the future.

If we levied a crippling blockade of canada or mexico, please believe that they would do more than just shoot rockets.

Im not sure if these israeli genocide supporters can actually read, as its clear that they can barely articulate cogent arguments, but history is clear that economic interference is an absolute deceleration of war. As such, israel declared war by setting in place a devastating blockade.

You bitches.

p.s. 84--In 2001, Israel was OCCUPYING GAZA..and hence the rockets back then. You fool!!!

If we levied a crippling blockade of canada or mexico, please believe that they would do more than just shoot rockets.

Im not sure if these israeli genocide supporters can actually read, as its clear that they can barely articulate cogent arguments, but history is clear that economic interference is an absolute deceleration of war. As such, israel declared war by setting in place a devastating blockade.

You bitches.

p.s. 84--In 2001, Israel was OCCUPYING GAZA..and hence the rockets back then. You fool!!!

70/83, funny that you criticize the hypothetical of Mexican rocket attacks against the US as a "strawman" argument, when you yourself posited the even less likely hypothetical of Mexico forcibly annexing Texas successfully.

Israel should just end this 60-year fiasco now. They should give all the palestinians 30 days to get out. Then, they should just level Gaza, Golan Heights, West Bank. Finally, since they'll be in deep shit with the rest of the world anyway, they should send their entire air force to Iran to take out the nuclear program.

As we know from watching Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Russia and China, the "sanctions" the UN will impose will be weak and easy to get around. Then, in five years, all the lefties will come out of the woodwork calling for an end to sanctions against Israel because it's "unjust."

I'm just so sick of this BS dispute. We all know that the only way this thing is ending is if one of the two sides destroys the other (I'm betting that Israel will win). If Bill Clinton couldn't get this thing wrapped up during Oslo, even after they had reached a deal, no one can.

86, you're off by a few years.

"In September 1993, leaders of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) signed the Oslo Accords calling for Palestinian administration of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank town of Jericho, which was implemented in May 1994. The Israeli forces left Gaza, leaving a new Palestinian National Authority to administer and police the city, along with most of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority, led by Yasser Arafat, chose Gaza as its first provincial headquarters. In September 1995, Israel and the PLO signed a second peace agreement extending the Palestinian Authority to most West Bank towns. The agreement also established an elected 88-member Palestinian National Council, which held its inaugural session in Gaza in March 1996."

If Israel was occupying Gaza in 2001, how could there be rocket attacks from Gaza against Israel? Pwned.

"The nomination certificate for Burris was hand-delivered to the Secretary of the Senate, but it was not accepted because it did not have Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White's signature on it. White previously refused to certify Burris because he was picked by Gov. Rod Blagojevich, now a criminal defendant."

http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/burris.senate.ceremony.2.900848.html

85/86 - If we blockaded Canada or Mexico and they were to launch rockets at civilian targets in the US you better believe that the USAF would be on the move ASAP. We would not tolerate a violent attack in response to a blockade and Israel should not tolerate such an attack either. A blockade is a much less severe action than rocket attacks.

85/86, so if Cuba started launching rockets and missiles at US cities in response to the current embargo, you would oppose US military bombing Cuban military installations to stop those attacks? Ok dude. If your friends or family live in those cities under attack, would their deaths be justified as well?
Or would it be justified only if they were Jewish?

89-- Your sources blow almost as hard as your mother. Btw, as a paralegal too inept to get into even the lowest of law schools, you should have been chastised enough to know to cite to something you quote. I can only infer from the lack of a cite that you eitehr made that crap up or that the source is as incredible as your baby dick. Either way. You are a loser.

Here is a fact for you: "15-Dec.-2001 Past 48 hours: Israeli occupation forces kill 13 Palestinians, destroy at least 50 homes and buildings, invade Beit Hanoun, bombard security installations "

source:
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2001/press2001.html

now, what was isreal doing in 2001? Not occupying gaza? Riiiiiiiiight.

89-- Your sources blow almost as hard as your mother. Btw, as a paralegal too inept to get into even the lowest of law schools, you should have been chastised enough to know to cite to something you quote. I can only infer from the lack of a cite that you eitehr made that crap up or that the source is as incredible as your baby dick. Either way. You are a loser.

Here is a fact for you: "15-Dec.-2001 Past 48 hours: Israeli occupation forces kill 13 Palestinians, destroy at least 50 homes and buildings, invade Beit Hanoun, bombard security installations "

source:
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2001/press2001.html

now, what was isreal doing in 2001? Not occupying gaza? Riiiiiiiiight.

89-- Your sources blow almost as hard as your mother. Btw, as a paralegal too inept to get into even the lowest of law schools, you should have been chastised enough to know to cite to something you quote. I can only infer from the lack of a cite that you eitehr made that crap up or that the source is as incredible as your baby dick. Either way. You are a loser.

Here is a fact for you: "15-Dec.-2001 Past 48 hours: Israeli occupation forces kill 13 Palestinians, destroy at least 50 homes and buildings, invade Beit Hanoun, bombard security installations "

source:
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2001/press2001.html

now, what was isreal doing in 2001? Not occupying gaza? Riiiiiiiiight.

I think ATL has been infiltrated by Hamas.

This will only end when the civilians of Gaza rise up against Hamas for using them as human shields to promote their terrorist objectives.

Hey 89,

"In 2003, Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon announced a controversial disengagement plan.[19] Israel was to remove all of its civilian and military presence in the Gaza Strip, (namely 21 Jewish settlements there, and four in the West Bank)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian_conflict

now, when was did isreal end its occupation? (not to mention what the fuck they were doing in the first place when occupying Gaza)

Hey 89,

"In 2003, Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon announced a controversial disengagement plan.[19] Israel was to remove all of its civilian and military presence in the Gaza Strip, (namely 21 Jewish settlements there, and four in the West Bank)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian_conflict

now, when was did isreal end its occupation? (not to mention what the fuck they were doing in the first place when occupying Gaza)

Hey 89,

"In 2003, Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon announced a controversial disengagement plan.[19] Israel was to remove all of its civilian and military presence in the Gaza Strip, (namely 21 Jewish settlements there, and four in the West Bank)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian_conflict

now, when was did isreal end its occupation? (not to mention what the fuck they were doing in the first place when occupying Gaza)

95, Beit Hanoun is on the Gaza-Israel border, and in 2001 Israeli forces entered Beit Hanoun to attack some military targets. So no, Israel was not "occupying" Gaza when it sent soldiers across the border for a few days to stop the rocket attacks that started in 2001 in Gaza, now no longer occupied by Israel.
My source was wikipedia, which I think provide facts less biased than the "Palestinian Center for Human Rights."

I love the "Israel brought this on themselves" argument. "Hey Israel, what did you expect!? You were wearing a short skirt and looked pretty slutty. You were asking for it."

87, I guess you don't know what a strawman is? Mexico annexing Texas is indeed unlikely, but it is a reasonable comparison to Israel annexing Gaza. Mexico launching rockets at California based on 150 year old claims to land that they had only barely occupied is not a reasonable comparison... Logic children, logic!

100, so those rocket attacks stopped in 2003, right?

91 and 92 are pretty hard to argue with.

103, so what is the cutoff point, since a 150 year old claim is no longer valid, but a 60 year old claim is? Is it 100? 120 years?
Furthermore, California was occupied by Spain, before Mexican independence, for 200 years or so. Ever heard of the missions? or the ranchos?

Or maybe you're saying that in 1848, the country of Mexico was only in existence for 20 years so the land claim does not count. Ok that's fine. In 1948, the country of Palestine did not exist at all. Case closed.

103, since 150 years is the statute of limitations, then Israel can just wait until 2098 and then the pro-Hamas apologists would suddenly stop harping on them, right? Great, see you then.

#s 3 and 11 you scumbags -- where were you and your ilk when the Israeli government was pleading and begging someone to cause Palestinians to stop terrorism, maybe if a billion of you would protest then this would not have happened. And what kind of people give out candy and sweets when someone dies? Arabs and Palestians of course! And after 9/11 -- all decent people were in sorrow -- what were Palestians doing? Partying on streets! And now they want America to

Arabs/ Muslims have dozens countries around the world, Jewish people have one. Finally, #s 3 and 11 (and your ilk) - who was the king who built Jerusalem? [Clue: his name was NOT Ahmed or Muhamed]

You Arabs/ Muslims can't live in peace anywhere in the world -- be it Middle East, India, Russia, China, Europe. All you can do is burn flags and cover your wives ...

You need Israel -- if it wasn't for Israel you'd kill and rape each other

104,

No silly! The rockets did not stop because after the occupying military withdrew, they imposed a crippling embargo upon Gaza, resulting in untold deaths and economic destruction. Economic interference, alone, is enough to declare war.

You are so silly! You jest as if you do not have an even elementry mastery of the fats. Silly zionist! Tricks are for kids.

=)

109, so the US Cuban embargo means the US is at war with Cuba, and Cuba is allowed to attack US cities at any time?

106, I never said that a 150 year old claim is inherently invalid, I just pointed out the obvious fact that all of a sudden dredging up a 150 year old claim based on having a few thousand settlers in a place is not the same as a fighting consistently for 60 years to regain independence from a foreign occupier. If you cannot see an obvious distinction there then I can't help you.

107, maybe you should pay attention in civ pro, instead of spending time on ATL. If the statute of limitations is 150 years, that just means you have 150 years to raise your complaint... Clearly the Palestinians have raised their complaint, hence the rocket fire, so the fight can last forever for all the statute of limitations cares.

101,

Your right. They only invaded the border town on the Gaza side of the boarder. It was not an occupation. What occupation? They were only there as an unwelcomed military force to spread around destruction. They were not occupying anything, but rather standing on palestinian land perpetuating genocide. They werent occupying anything. Its just a border town...They will brutalize civilans, kill babies, and take what they want. they will leave when they want to, and they''ll take the tank off your lawn when they do. But its not occupation.

Obviously, you have never played "just the tip" with a woman, let alone felt the warm embrace of one. If you did, you might have well figured out at the ripe old age of 32 that whether its just the tip, or a boarder town, its penetration nonetheless.

Its a concept completely foriegn from a wrap a round, so i dont expect you to know anything about it.

101,

Your right. They only invaded the border town on the Gaza side of the boarder. It was not an occupation. What occupation? They were only there as an unwelcomed military force to spread around destruction. They were not occupying anything, but rather standing on palestinian land perpetuating genocide. They werent occupying anything. Its just a border town...They will brutalize civilans, kill babies, and take what they want. they will leave when they want to, and they''ll take the tank off your lawn when they do. But its not occupation.

Obviously, you have never played "just the tip" with a woman, let alone felt the warm embrace of one. If you did, you might have well figured out at the ripe old age of 32 that whether its just the tip, or a boarder town, its penetration nonetheless.

Its a concept completely foriegn from a wrap a round, so i dont expect you to know anything about it.

101,

Your right. They only invaded the border town on the Gaza side of the boarder. It was not an occupation. What occupation? They were only there as an unwelcomed military force to spread around destruction. They were not occupying anything, but rather standing on palestinian land perpetuating genocide. They werent occupying anything. Its just a border town...They will brutalize civilans, kill babies, and take what they want. they will leave when they want to, and they''ll take the tank off your lawn when they do. But its not occupation.

Obviously, you have never played "just the tip" with a woman, let alone felt the warm embrace of one. If you did, you might have well figured out at the ripe old age of 32 that whether its just the tip, or a boarder town, its penetration nonetheless.

Its a concept completely foriegn from a wrap a round, so i dont expect you to know anything about it.

101,

Your right. They only invaded the border town on the Gaza side of the boarder. It was not an occupation. What occupation? They were only there as an unwelcomed military force to spread around destruction. They were not occupying anything, but rather standing on palestinian land perpetuating genocide. They werent occupying anything. Its just a border town...They will brutalize civilans, kill babies, and take what they want. they will leave when they want to, and they''ll take the tank off your lawn when they do. But its not occupation.

Obviously, you have never played "just the tip" with a woman, let alone felt the warm embrace of one. If you did, you might have well figured out at the ripe old age of 32 that whether its just the tip, or a boarder town, its penetration nonetheless.

Its a concept completely foriegn from a wrap a round, so i dont expect you to know anything about it.

Isreal can't give those scumbags anything, not an inch! Where is the mention of withdrawl from Gaza?! What good did it do! #109 -- you ignorant scumbag, the economic blockade was imposed after Hamas terrorists started killing other Palestinians from roofs -- If you weren't an ignorant f** -- you'd know that YOU -- Arabs/ Muslims -- need Isreal as much as US does, otherwise you'd kill and rape each other!

#s 3, 11, 104 -- you scumbags -- where were you and your ilk when the Israeli government was pleading and begging someone to cause Palestinians to stop terrorism, maybe if a billion of you would protest then this would not have happened. And what kind of people give out candy and sweets when someone dies? Arabs and Palestians of course! And after 9/11 -- all decent people were in sorrow -- what were Palestians doing? Partying on streets! And now they want America to

Arabs/ Muslims have dozens countries around the world, Jewish people have one. Finally, #s 3 and 11 (and your ilk) - who was the king who built Jerusalem? [Clue: his name was NOT Ahmed or Muhamed]

You Arabs/ Muslims can't live in peace anywhere in the world -- be it Middle East, India, Russia, China, Europe. All you can do is burn flags and cover your wives ...

You need Israel -- if it wasn't for Israel you'd kill and rape each other

So the Gaza strip and Hamas are a recognized government? I thought that Hamas was an illegitimate group of thugs that had taken over by force. Under the reasoning that you are using, can we blockade the Bronx (after taking the good parts and giving them to Westchester County) and then drop bombs on the apartment buildings that criminal gangs live in? Or would that be wrong?

Isreal can't give those scumbags anything, not an inch! Where is the mention of withdrawl from Gaza?! What good did it do! #109 -- you ignorant scumbag, the economic blockade was imposed after Hamas terrorists started killing other Palestinians and throwing them from roof-tops -- If you weren't an ignorant f** -- you'd know that YOU -- Arabs/ Muslims -- need Isreal as much as US does, otherwise you'd kill and rape each other!

#s 3, 11, 104 -- you scumbags -- where were you and your ilk when the Israeli government was pleading and begging someone to cause Palestinians to stop terrorism, maybe if a billion of you would protest then this would not have happened. And what kind of people give out candy and sweets when someone dies? Arabs and Palestians of course! And after 9/11 -- all decent people were in sorrow -- what were Palestians doing? Partying on streets! And now they want America to

Arabs/ Muslims have dozens countries around the world, Jewish people have one. Finally, #s 3 and 11 (and your ilk) - who was the king who built Jerusalem? [Clue: his name was NOT Ahmed or Muhamed]

You Arabs/ Muslims can't live in peace anywhere in the world -- be it Middle East, India, Russia, China, Europe. All you can do is burn flags and cover your wives ...

You need Israel -- if it wasn't for Israel you'd kill and rape each other

Isreal can't give those scumbags anything, not an inch! Where is the mention of withdrawl from Gaza?! What good did it do! #109 -- you ignorant scumbag, the economic blockade was imposed after Hamas terrorists started killing other Palestinians and throwing them from roof-tops -- If you weren't an ignorant f** -- you'd know that YOU -- Arabs/ Muslims -- need Isreal as much as US does, otherwise you'd kill and rape each other!

#s 3, 11, 104 -- you scumbags -- where were you and your ilk when the Israeli government was pleading and begging someone to cause Palestinians to stop terrorism, maybe if a billion of you would protest then this would not have happened. And what kind of people give out candy and sweets when someone dies? Arabs and Palestians of course! And after 9/11 -- all decent people were in sorrow -- what were Palestians doing? Partying on streets! And now they want America to

Arabs/ Muslims have dozens countries around the world, Jewish people have one. Finally, #s 3 and 11 (and your ilk) - who was the king who built Jerusalem? [Clue: his name was NOT Ahmed or Muhamed]

You Arabs/ Muslims can't live in peace anywhere in the world -- be it Middle East, India, Russia, China, Europe. All you can do is burn flags and cover your wives ...

You need Israel -- if it wasn't for Israel you'd kill and rape each other

Israel doesn't need defenders. With douchebag friends like 112 on the side of Hamas, who needs enemies.

Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner! 118, you are the craziest poster in the history of ATL! Yay!!!!

117, are those criminal gangs in the Bronx launching rockets at the rest of New York?
Funny you forgot to mention whether that little fact is true or not in your hypo.

Isreal can't give those scumbags anything, not an inch! Where is the mention of withdrawl from Gaza?! What good did it do! #109 -- you ignorant scumbag, the economic blockade was imposed after Hamas terrorists started killing other Palestinians and throwing them from roof-tops -- If you weren't an ignorant f** -- you'd know that YOU -- Arabs/ Muslims -- need Isreal as much as US does, otherwise you'd kill and rape each other!

#s 3, 11, 104 -- you scumbags -- where were you and your ilk when the Israeli government was pleading and begging someone to cause Palestinians to stop terrorism, maybe if a billion of you would protest then this would not have happened. And what kind of people give out candy and sweets when someone dies? Arabs and Palestians of course! And after 9/11 -- all decent people were in sorrow -- what were Palestians doing? Partying on streets! And now they want America to

Arabs/ Muslims have dozens countries around the world, Jewish people have one. Finally, #s 3 and 11 (and your ilk) - who was the king who built Jerusalem? [Clue: his name was NOT Ahmed or Muhamed]

You Arabs/ Muslims can't live in peace anywhere in the world -- be it Middle East, India, Russia, China, Europe. All you can do is burn flags and cover your wives ...

You need Israel -- if it wasn't for Israel you'd kill and rape each other

122, yes after we have blockaded the Bronx, criminal gangs snuck out and carjacked some cars, sold some drugs and then just for fun launched some rockets across the river into Manhatten where they blew up a swing set in a park and lightly injured some very slow old people.

124 - I knew there was a reason that I hated the Bronx. I also hate fat people... is that wrong?

It is a shame that organized religion cannot be removed from this mess, we would be able to settle the entire mess in a week. But of course the holy people have to ruin it for the rest of us because they are not interested in this world. And they are being used (on both sides) by people making money and keeping power.

Fat people suck and cause my health insurance premiums to rise.

124, did the Hamas rockets only blow up a swing set in a park and lightly injured some very slow old people in a single incident?
Is there a reason you couldn't use the real facts in your analogy?

How many rockets, car jackings and drugs from the Bronx before it becomes o.k. to Blockade it and drop the bombs? It would be ok at some point?

No problem with targeted killings, no problem with blowing up rocket launchers, but has wholesale civilian punishment ever worked? And dropping bombs from jets and blockades is a general punishment.

#123 -- Well said; but why are you reasoning with these people???

How about CNN running same images over and over within a span of 2 mins... and letting so called "journalists" ramble on and on about how unfair IDF is, without asking a single legitimate question

And for the analogy to be real, the people in the rest of New York would be descended from Eastern Europeans who had moved in 60 years before and taken land by force from the gang members' grandparents.

#126 -- this is not about religion. Jewish people shouldn't be living in Europe, etc. because they are foreigners there. Jewish people belong in Israel which is well documented in history. Exactly what the borders of Israel should be should be resolved politically

#3 (the original troll who hijacked this thread) must be laughing his ass off right now.

Also, from what I can gather from this thread, right-wing Jewish people in the US have gotten some serious sand up their vaginas over the American media FINALLY sending some negative press Israel's way. Awesome.

Finally, interesting fact: did you know that Israeli secret service (Mossad) used to be one of Hamas's biggest enablers?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/967828.html
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/25/how_israel_created_hamas_and_k/

They offered support to Hamas for years in hopes that Palestinian factions would eventually undermine each other, and it happened (see Civil War in Gaza last year). Eventual result of this: moderate, pro-peace Palestinians have been marginalized, and wacked out terrorist Hamas is in power.

Good job Israel!!!

<3 A pro-peace Palestinian-American

Yea 132 I hear the Gyspys are moving back to India and taking some land there, because it is in their history, and then the Normans are going back to France and the Saxons are . . .

and then we are going back to Kenya because historically that is where we came from.

133 -- you are a paranoid conspiracy theory F**** ; Who killed JFK?

AND HOW SAID FOR ROLAND BURRIS???? POOR LITTLE GUY CAN'T EVEN GET ATTENTION AND RESPECT HERE

133 -- you are a paranoid conspiracy theory F**** ; Who killed JFK?

AND HOW SAD FOR ROLAND BURRIS???? POOR LITTLE GUY CAN'T EVEN GET ATTENTION AND RESPECT HERE

133 -- you are a paranoid conspiracy theory F**** ; Who killed JFK?

AND HOW SAD FOR ROLAND BURRIS???? POOR LITTLE GUY CAN'T EVEN GET ATTENTION AND RESPECT HERE

129 - did you really just equate blockades and bombings? They are not even close to the same thing. Isreal is not intentionally targeting civilians anyway. They are not trying to force Hamas into submittion by killing innocent people. Rather they are attacking military targets that Hamas has shielded with a civilian population. Israel is just punching through the shield that Hamas has erected. The purpose of the Israili attacks are to disable/destroy dangerous "military" targets, the civilain casualties are unavoidable but they are not the goal.

134, I also hear the Palestinians are trying to move back to Israel and taking some land there, because it is in their history. What have you heard?

138 the point is that Hamas and Gaza are not a legitimate entity to fight a war against. When fighting a war civilian casualties are inevitable. When targeting criminals I am not sure it is so proper.

I am not suggesting that Israel is targeting civilians, but they do seem to be following the same policy as America followed with the Native Americans, forced reservations and then collective group punishment.

You take my grandparents house from me I am going to attempt to take it back from you as soon as I find someone to buy me a gun.

134 -- Who founded and build the city of Jerusalem? [Throwing a musque there, doesn't count as building] Say it was that tyrant Muhamad -- show us how ignorant you are

Then you got your ass handed to you by the Babylonians and then the Romans.

Even a dog knows the difference between being stumbled over and being kicked.

But apparently the Hamas apologists are less intellectually capable than dogs when they try to equate intentional attacks on civilians (rocket attacks) and unintentional attacks on civilians (IDF assaults).

144, not Hamas but the civilians. I dog bit me yesterday, so I have laid out poisoned meat throughout my neighborhood. If I accidentally get a few cats, oh well, they should have stopped the dog before it bit me.

In response to 141: True nature of the Jews -- just protecting themselves. If the Arabs/ Muslims had anywhere close to military muscle of Israel, there would be 6 million dead by now, not a few hundred civilians

140 - I see where you are going but I disagree with your characterization. Hamas is trying to claim all of the power and authority of a legitimate government so I don't see why Israel cannot wage war against them. Moreover it seems that Hamas is someone outside of the scope of your everyday criminal. I don't know that there is a much better way to go about fighting an entity that has rockets and other seriously dangerous weapons capable of leveling mass casualties on your own civilian populaiton.

I also don't think that you can equate what Israel is doing to the forced migration of Native Americans. Israel is trying to maintain its own integrity. And I don't think that they are engaging in "mass punishment", that is what Hamas was doing when they launched rockets at Israeli cities.

135-137: My money is on Lassie killing JFK. Conniving bitch won our hearts, only to rip them out and use them as chew toys.

Also, learn how to hit "Post Comment" once, you spastic fuck.

<3 133

138,

How in the world do you know what israel is targeting? Are you privy to some sort of super secret insider info that everyone else does not know about? The sights and sounds tell us that isreal is KILLING everyone. Women and children alike. All innocent. I hope everyone keeps this blood bath in mind when they ask, 10 years from now, why the 10 year old who watched his family get blow up becomes a suiside bomber. I can faithfully tell you it has nothing to do with hamas micky mouse shows.

And lets leave jews outta this. I, as an american, muslim, and arab, have nothing against jews and vehimently object to them being universally condemmed. I love my jewish brothers, as i do all others. there are many good, peace loving jews who object to this slaughter. They, along with people from all over the world, marched with us in NYC against this genocide.

The fact of the matter is that I am against baby killing, genocide, and murder. That is why i speak out against isreal, and the horrible, horrible acts they are perpertrating.

138,

How in the world do you know what israel is targeting? Are you privy to some sort of super secret insider info that everyone else does not know about? The sights and sounds tell us that isreal is KILLING everyone. Women and children alike. All innocent. I hope everyone keeps this blood bath in mind when they ask, 10 years from now, why the 10 year old who watched his family get blow up becomes a suiside bomber. I can faithfully tell you it has nothing to do with hamas micky mouse shows.

And lets leave jews outta this. I, as an american, muslim, and arab, have nothing against jews and vehimently object to them being universally condemmed. I love my jewish brothers, as i do all others. there are many good, peace loving jews who object to this slaughter. They, along with people from all over the world, marched with us in NYC against this genocide.

The fact of the matter is that I am against baby killing, genocide, and murder. That is why i speak out against isreal, and the horrible, horrible acts they are perpertrating.

145, did your neighborhood cats have the power to throw out the dog but elected the dog to be their leader anyway, while supporting the dog bites?

Akhil Amar (Yale) and Larry Tribe (Harvard) say that the US Senate has the Constitutional right to block Burris. Your intellectual superiors have spoken. Case closed.

145, if the dog bit you, then hid behind some cats, then bit your kid, and hid behind some cats, then bit your wife and hid behind some cats. I'm pretty sure that you would shoot right through the damn cats to kill that dog.

153 good point. I would have shot the dog and then shot the cats for fun and because they also have teeth, but they are fucking animals.

I would personally shoot every person in my neighborhood to protect my family, but I am not sure that should be used as a basis for national policy.

Akhil Amar is a terrorist

Senator Burris will be seated as a US Senator

150 -- FUCK YOU. Don't try to sound reasonable by agreeing for Jews to breathe the air on Earth.

Jews = Isreal. You're the worse kind of racist there is saying that Jews are ok as long as they are weak and have no country of their own

When Muslim Turkey uses Nato-trained troops, warplanes and tanks to kill Kurds, that's acceptable and US cannot stand in its way, but Isreal cannot do the same!

Next time Hamas fires rockets at civilians, speak out against it! And Protest against it! And then you and your people can avoid this!

ALL ARABS -- NEXT TIME HAMAS FIRES ROCKETS, SPEAK OUT AGAINST IT, PROTEST AGAINST IT

AND THEN YOU AND YOUR PEOPLE CAN AVOID MILITARY ACTIONS

156 do you realize that if you cut and pasted Palestinian everytime you said Jew your post would also make sense. Hmmmm. Kind of makes you think.

158,

Outstanding. Really, outstanding.

Why are their "american muslim arab palestinian" people on ATL in the first place to spout this crap? They certainly won't work for a respectable firm (for long at least) regardless of their AA PC admission to law school.

I dare any pro-Palestine person here to go to the managing partner of any T200 law firm and repeat what they've said here and see how their next performance review goes.

Face it, Jews or Pro-Jewish gentiles control everything -- and for good reason. What have those sand monkeys ever given us besides a lot of oil.

158, except for the minor fact that Israel and most of its people support a two-state solution and withdrew from the West Bank so the PA can self-govern. When have Arabs ever voluntarily withdrawn from territories to give them to Israel?

You can try to be clever with your analogies, but soon reality catches up with you.

Back to the topic of Burris - his biggest defining characteristic is that he agreed to be appointed by Blagojevich. What self-respecting and moral person would have done this? Burris, by his agreement to be associated with Blagojevich - for his own personal gain - shows that he is nothing more than a corrupt self-interested politician. This tool is trying to get into the Senate the only way he knows he's ever going to get into it.

And don't you suppose he made a huge soul-selling deal with Blagojevich? Would the Blagojevich that we all know to be cow dung demand any less?

And is anyone else pissed off that Burris is now playing the "race" card to take the focus off the fact that he was appointed by morally corrupt cow dung? Do you think any white person appointed by Blagojevich would get any sympathy from any person in America?

Burris reminds me of so many other black politicians who are completely self-serving yet get away with it because they're black - e.g. Kwame Kilpatrick, Jesse Jackson.

Note - I know that white politicians are crooked also, but they don't get the enormous politically-correct "race" defense. I bet if Blagojevich were black, there would be a huge contingent of people - led by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton - crying "racism" while choosing to ignore actual evidence.

Back to the topic of Burris - his biggest defining characteristic is that he agreed to be appointed by Blagojevich. What self-respecting and moral person would have done this? Burris, by his agreement to be associated with Blagojevich - for his own personal gain - shows that he is nothing more than a corrupt self-interested politician. This tool is trying to get into the Senate the only way he knows he's ever going to get into it.

And don't you suppose he made a huge soul-selling deal with Blagojevich? Would the Blagojevich that we all know to be cow dung demand any less?

And is anyone else pissed off that Burris is now playing the "race" card to take the focus off the fact that he was appointed by morally corrupt cow dung? Do you think any white person appointed by Blagojevich would get any sympathy from any person in America?

Burris reminds me of so many other black politicians who are completely self-serving yet get away with it because they're black - e.g. Kwame Kilpatrick, Jesse Jackson.

Note - I know that white politicians are crooked also, but they don't get the enormous politically-correct "race" defense. I bet if Blagojevich were black, there would be a huge contingent of people - led by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton - crying "racism" while choosing to ignore actual evidence.

160

Nice of you to recognize that pro isreal folks cannot handle the truth, and speaking the truth and hard facts will result in negative performance reviews. Performace reviews that have nothing to do with performance, but rather the constitutional excercising of our rights to free speech.

By the way, The Federal Judge I work for, a jew, knows my stance on truth and justice, and just wrote an outstnding letter of rec to the DOJ. Looks like you are wrong, again. Jews from all over, even accomplished attorneys, know that justice and truth are imutable....regarless of your heratige.

I dare you, 160, to think.

164, the constitution is irrelevant for private entities for your "constitutional excercising of our rights to free speech."
I hope your "Federal Judge" is a magistrate judge or some other level where law mistakes by clerks don't do lasting harm.

damn - how did an article about another pompous ass black man more interested in personal aggrandizement than serving the people of Illinois turn into an Israel bashing shout fest? Does this black man really think that he is serving his would be constituents by trying to force his way into the Senate? By dragging it throught the courts for months on end? Just for another line in his epitaph? This guy is really no better than the Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson/OJ Simpson types who have failed at black leadership for so long. Take a page from the Richardson/Obama playback and resign now!!

Hey moderator - if you remove this, remove 3, 20, etc, and all the other racist posts as well.

165, A moment of your time before you go back to the temping doc review you were hired to complete.

you are right about constitutional rights. Simply exposing your assumption, however, reveals that you are a fool.

I did not say that constitutional rights somehow support free speech in a private setting (hey loser, its me, your assumption!), but rather, I was drawing on the principle that free speech is a good thing, not a bad thing, as exemplified by the fact it is codified in the constitution. After all, as a proud American, one who is looking for what is in the best interest of America, not blood thirsty baby killing isreal, I look to the constitution as the ultimate incarnation of ideals. The difference is subtle, so I don’t expect you to catch it, much like you catch at night when your sugar daddy pitches.

btw, sick come back.

That people are still placing the blame on Israel for this is utterly alien to me. Why does the left always rush to place the blame on the most westernized party? The fact that Israel is a strong victim does not obscure the fact that it is a victim. It is a state. It has a right to exist, and protect its citizens. It ceded Gaza and look what it gets in return: Hamas gives up negotiations after six months and starts systematically murdering Israeli citizens. And when Israeli takes steps to preserve the lives of its citizens, what happens? The left blames Israel. Strength does not equal injustice.

I have yet to hear one pro-palestinean justification for what has been done that does not reduce to "roll back the clock" and a rejection of Israel's fundamental right to exist. Even if I granted you 100% of your argument that Israel was unjustly established, which I do not, it is irrelevant. It is a state. It has a right to exist. If you attack a state it will neutralize the threat. What the hell did you expect?

And for God's sake stop trying to find moral equivalence between those who seek to cause civilian casualties as a deliberate tactic, and collateral damage.

Lastly:

160, you contribute nothing. Stop being an idiot.

167, the constitution also says the government can't unreasonably search and seize your stuff, so why don't you asser your "constitutional" 4th amendement right the next time your mom tries to search under your bed in her basement and take away your porn. Ask her for a warrant since that's the "ultimate incarnation of ideals."

169,

dont talk about mothers till your 2 fathers get divorced. Think about it.

And if i ever needed to replace my stash of porn, ill just make new ones with your mom. that reminds me, do you have a dime? and what time will you be coming home from school today. I want to have the cameras out of there before you get home.

166 here - you know, I am a pretty humble guy usually. I actually believe that there are people out there who are smarter than me. After reading some of the pro-terrorist comments on this thread, I have a lot more confidence in myself. I am just a 2L on winter break here - but some of the f**ked up comments must have come from actual attorneys - attorneys who are interested in the NY Biglaw scene - not the real estate shmucks advertising on the side of facebook. I feel like I will be the smartest SA at my V5 firm this summer. Thank you racist fucks. I get pleasure from seeing so much incompetence in my peers.

Burris wants the limelight. Done. Its obvious to all. That he would so willfully help Blago attempt to change the story, knowing full well that his race would be falsely made an issue in the course of it in an attempt to obscure the issue that someone fucking tried to sell a senate seat like a set of lawn furniture, should prove to everyone that he does not and never did have the public interest at heart.

170, so not only are you an anti-Semite who calls Jews blood thirsty baby killers (do they drink the blood from the babies too?), but in your repetitive retort all you managed was to show that you're additionally a homophobe.
Wow, you must be very proud of yourself.

This doush knows he won't be the "FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS," right? He is filling Obama's seat after all, right? He would also only be the junior senator. Why does this pompous ass want the job anyway?

Burris wants the limelight. Done. Its obvious to all. That he would so willfully help Blago attempt to change the story, knowing full well that his race would be falsely made an issue in the course of it in an attempt to obscure the issue that someone fucking tried to sell a senate seat like a set of lawn furniture, should prove to everyone that he does not and never did have the public interest at heart.

Burris wants the limelight. Done. Its obvious to all. That he would so willfully help Blago attempt to change the story, knowing full well that his race would be falsely made an issue in the course of it in an attempt to obscure the issue that someone fucking tried to sell a senate seat like a set of lawn furniture, should prove to everyone that he does not and never did have the public interest at heart.

160, you're a fucking racist asshole.

Now, educate yourself you ignorant douchenozzle:
http://www.adc.org/index.php?id=247

Yes, 166, you will be the smartest SA in your class...the smartest Stupid Ass among Stupid Asses. You must be if you dont know the difference between propaganda, which you apparently have a regular diet of, and the real world. Babies are dying, civilans are being killed. If you dont have the balls to stand up and at the very least recognize that such acts are wrong, then go back to the office of the seocnd rate journal you wrote on to and read a book. Any Book, i dont care. Just start reading.

It is rather paradoxical that, in the same comment, you state that you are a measly 2L, but also profess that you apparently have a sufficient mastery of the real world enough to condemn real attorneys. I cant wait for you to work under me at the big firm, where I can utilize our system of meritocracy to work your ass right out of big law and into the echelons of the real estate attorneys who advertise on facebook.

Enjoy your break while you can....you wont enjoy it as much when grades come in.

Says he is humble....i bet your humble now biotch,

177, why did the list of "Arab contributions to civilization" stop at 300 years ago?

If babies being killed as collateral damage of a state justly defending itself offends you so much, 178, then you must be really incensed over our abortion on demand policy, seeing as you always "stand up and at the very least recognize that such acts are wrong."

Oh, right. Liberal. Forgot.

178, given that you are so incensed by babies dying as the collateral damage of a state justly defending itself against attack, you must be really pissed at our abortion on demand policy. I hear its even worse for babies than errant Israeli bombs. I mean, if you're consistent, you'll "stand up and at the very least recognize that such acts are wrong."

Wait, why are you still sitting? Oh, right, I forgot. You're a liberal.

Burris is standing in the rain outside the Senate. Hilarious!!!

173,

I said Isreal are baby killers. I said nothing about jews. I have no problem with jews, and as i said before, jewish brothers in peace marched alongside me to protest these horrible acts by isreal commited in the name of jews. Im not the only one to call isreal baby killers...cause it simply true. if you dont believe me, then read these links:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/01/06/2009-01-06_israeli_airstrikes_hit_schools_in_gaza_c.html

and your personal fav, im sure, the ny post: "An Israeli bombardment struck outside a U.N. school where hundreds of Palestinians had sought refuge on Tuesday, the U.N. and Palestinian medics said, killing at least 30 people - many of them children whose parents wailed in grief at a hospital filled with dead and wounded." http://www.nypost.com/seven/01062009/news/worldnews/palestinians_say_strike_on_un_school_kil_147452.htm

I guess the Daily news and the Post are anti semites for speaking teh facts about isreal killing babies? Then i guess we are all anti semites. Welcome to the club of antisemite truth and justice.

So, other than trying to shift the conversation away form the merits of Isreal's baby killing, there is no reason for you to call me an anti semite. NIce try tho. Your cool deleivery almost puls the wool over people's eyes.

As to the homophob....I didnt say anything homophobic. By outting that commentor, i simply stated what homosexuals do for sexual gratification. Its interesting that you find a discussion of homosexual habits as inherently homophobic.

So, now, whos the one with dis information and homophobia? Wait for it, wait for it...its JEW! oooops, i meant YOU!

179 - Because you touch yourself at night.

-177

180/181,

Democrats in this country have a long history of supporting Israel. Liberal does not equal anti-israel.

185: on the Israel issue, lots of socially liberal democratic voters (ex: New York Jews) are to the right of Genghis Khan. This issue is tricky from a left-right point of view, but the "blame Israel" crowd is definitely "liberal." Witness people like 183 who use sanctimonious terms like "brothers in peace."

-180/81 (goddamnit MysTTTal fix the comment mechanic...)

@183: LOL!! Preach brotha, preach!!

please follow this link and see the truth on israel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LN-dKwod3VM

this is the first of 6 - i believe

So 183, you said 170 has "2 fathers" because you know him personally, and not because you're calling him gay as a derogatory insult? Right.

183, so you're not anti-Semitic and you use the word "JEW" like that in your last sentence because of your great love of your Jewish brothers? And by your last sentence you assume 173 (me) must be a Jew since I support Israel?
You're not doing yourself any favors when you reveal your true colors. Guess what, I'm not Jewish.

And you claim that I have "2 fathers" for no homophobic reason at all. Ok I'm sure we all believe you.

Stop trying to use accusations of racism and homophobia to discredit 183. Engage his arguments head on. Don't deflect them with argumentum ad hominum. Which is what you guys are doing.

Try this: Israel is a state, and when you try to kill the citizens of a state, sometimes the state shoots back. This is 100% Hamas' fault.

See where that takes you. If he engages you on it, see how many exchanges it takes him to question Israel's right to exist. At that point you may declare victory.

189, 190

Great resp to the substantive issues i raised in my post. All I wrote, all the points I made, and you choose to focus on a few jokes I made in the process? I guess it remains that the facts in my post are irrefutable. I win, I win! Ok, i am toally caught off guard here...but never ot caught completely of guard, i did prepare a lil something just in case i won.

First of all, I would like to thank pretentious pricks like 189 and 190, this moment to revel in the glory of justice would not be possible with out them . Also, i'd like to thank all the people who have struggled mightly against injustice all over the world, including against Apartheid in South africa and in Isreal...with you you, i would not have a fervent social consciousness from which to leap off of. Finally, I'd like to thank truth. With out your undying ablsoutness in cold hard facts, i could not have impeached people like 189 and 190 with articles written by usually zionist friendly news papers. Thank you truth, for always being there, even when people dont want to recognize you. I recognize you, and promise to always being you to the forefront of any discussion, not matter how convoluted people who carelessly throw around the word "anti semite" try to make it.

Love and peace to all.

80 Posted by guest | Permalink
Tuesday, January 6, 2009 11:03 AM

69, my point is that Burris isn't the one operating against the spirit of the law. It's the people digging through the constitution trying to find technicalities and obscure reasons to block his appointment. My original point is that this sentence "Burris doesn't seem to quite have the letter or the spirit of the law on his side." is wrong.

Also, does any Gov. under federal investigation not have the power to appoint? Would state and federal officials be operating in the "spirit" of the law if they tried to block appointments made by Bill Ricardson for example?

Cease whining about how the poor, innocent until proven guilty Governor is being unjustly denied what the "spirit of the law" grants him. The issue here is not what Rod Blago has a right to: that will be determined in accordance with due process by the criminal courts.

This is about what the Governor of Illinois should not, and cannot, do. Blago hasn't been denied the power to appoint because he's under investigation: the power to appoint is vested in TWO Illinois public servants, not just Blago, and one of those two won't agree to the other's pick because there's serious questions about the propriety of him making such a pick. End of story. Public servants are held to a higher standard than "have they been proven to have committed a crime" and the Illinois Secretary of State has every right, and has a duty, to withhold his certification of Blago's pick if he thinks it inappropriate to certify that pick.

Let Blago replace him with a rubber stamper if he dares and can pull it off. It just digs the hole deeper for Blago.

192 - respond to the substance of 168 and I'll agree you've won.

192 - respond to the substance of 168 and I'll agree you've won.

192 - respond to the substance of 168 and I'll agree you've won.

183/192, funny how you suddenly now place such importance on responding to the substance of posts, when you utterly failed to respond to the substance of 169 when you responded to him with your ad hominem attack.

The Illinois Sec. of State is a notary of the pick chosen by the governor. Can anyone show me where he has independent will and choice outside of that? Does he have the right to not certify the choice of the Gov? If he does let me see.

Everyone posting on the Hamas/Israel issue is pretty f**king self-righteous.

However, some good points emerge - 1. Palestinians should protest (with words, out loud) rocket attacks into Israel targeted at civilians.
2. Israel should try to be more f**king careful when it bombs civilian areas. No one wins when scores of dead civilians (including childeren, babies) are constantly paraded accross the news. In attempting to defend itself, Israel really is creating lasting memories of pure hatred on the arab street.
3. Economic blockades never justify civilian-targeted violence. Take a page from MLK and Gandhi, peacefully protest (not in Times Square, that means nothing) and see what happens. If peaceful protesting was sustained, Israel's citizenry would demand concessions for the Palestinians, FAST.
4. Israel has a right to defend its citizens. And yes, Israel does not target civilians, for the most part, on purpose. do they f**k up sometimes? of course. but this is not propaganda. Nothing will make it seem ok to people who were killed by Israel, but its true.
5. being racist really makes everyone look like fools.

The above was brought to you by truth. Own it.

198, yes, Elie doesn't fully comprehend the law and doesn't know who would win the technical points of law. However, lets not divert attention away from the fact that Blagojevich and his ridiculous denials (no doubt to try to get a better plea bargain or work out some sort of other escape from culpability) is emblematic of what is wrong in politics and that Burris is nothing more than Blago's loser tool (who now acts as if he doesn't understand why people are indignant that he agreed to be appointed by soulless Blago).

198: you see, I'm afraid you have it backwards. The state constitution states that the Governor appoints and the Sec. State certifies the appointment--if you'd like that to be read as requiring something less than the consent of the Sec. State, carry the burden. Otherwise, STFU.

The fact that he has the "right" not to certify the choice of the Governor is facially plain from the fact that his positive act is necessary for the appointment to be valid. He doesn't act--makes a decision not to act--and there's no valid appointment. He's made that decision, and there's no valid appointment.

The only way for that to be counteracted is (1) make the argument to a court for mandamus compelling the Sec. State to certify (i.e., you prove there is no right to refuse, not I prove that there is a right to refuse--burdens matter a lot), or (2) find a way to fire and replace the Sec State. Get it yet?

199: you forgot to mention 2a. Militants need to stop basing their attacks from civilian areas in an attempt to create PR and martyrs.

To deliberately launch an attack from a civilian population center--mosque, hospital, retirement home, school, etc.--is the very definition of barbarism. To reply to such an attack is neither immoral nor unjustified--merely regrettable in the extreme.

Sorry 202, if a terrorists launches an attack from an area crowded with civilians and I respond by firing a missle back at the area crowded with civilians then I am also a terrorist. We are both immoral bastards inflicting harm on civilians. Two wrongs do not make a right.

202 -- Take a look at this picture.

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/01/06/world/0106-GAZA_7.html

It's an image of an arm that was once attached to the body of a little Palestinian girl (who is now dead). This girl was mutilated only because she happened to be in the same building where a Hamas fighter made his home.

Now, see if your conscience will allow you to believe the bullshit that you just wrote.

Hi, my name is xenophobic white American racist.

I enjoy parroting such catchy phrases as "Israel is the most democratic, open, and progressive nation in the Middle East."

I mostly base this belief on the fact that Ashkenazi Jews--who run the show in Israel--look pretty white to me. Or at least, they look whiter than those dirty sand monkeys who populate the rest of that general area where Sweet Baby Jesus was born.

Also, when people show me New York Times stories entitled "Israel Puts Media Clamp on Gaza"--located here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/middleeast/07media.html?ref=middleeast)--I ignore them, because they just don't jive with my xenophobic racist beliefs.

Anyways, I'd better get back to giving Israel every benefit of the doubt just because white people control it. Bye for now!

Good grief...

Bombing schools with kids in them is terrible under any circumstances. Period. It is not ever "merely regrettable."

Intentionally basing military operations out of schools filled with kids in them is terrible under any circumstances. Period. It is not ever "bullshit" to say that it is barbaric to do this.

This is what is so wrong with the situation over there... everyone is a fucking asshole who only sees their own side. Nothing good is going to come out of that region until both sides get their heads out of their asses and start acting like humans.

206: Sorry, I wasn't specific enough with my accusation of bullshit. That was entirely directed at 202's "merely regrettable" line.

I agree that basing military operations out of schools is also barbaric. However, The New York Times reported today that it's questionable whether this has always been the case whenever civilians in Gaza have been targeted.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/middleeast/07mideast.html?pagewanted=2&ref=middleeast

About mid-way down the page, the story reads: "Israel said it had hit some civilian targets because they housed rockets, launchers or militants. It offered limited evidence of its claim."

Just sayin, don't believe everything you hear or read.

164, yes in the Jew- and pro-Jew gentile dominated world, working for a Jewish judge, you are respected and safe to speak your mind. In Hamas (Iran, Hezhbulah ... ) world, if any of us tried to speak our mind we would be decapitated and ripped to peaces (and called collaborators)

Now you're crying that you're being pick-up upon, when Israel stops, Hamas and you will declare a victory ... well, Israel and the world should f*** Hamas in the ass without vasaline so they can feel it

A mosoleum? I often like to lie in the grass next to the mosoleum.

205, if those white people are wrong, pray tell me which non-Israel country is "the most democratic, open, and progressive nation in the Middle East"? Egypt? Turkey? Saudi Arabia? Syria? I need a laugh right now so your quick response is appreciated.

At a very minimum, that country should have regular elections, religious conversions without getting beheaded, and women drivers. Thanks.
~ 210

205
Shouldn't you be driving a cab. After all, it is rush hour.
And stop trying to take the West Side Highway. I'm not a tourist.
xenophobic white American racist

208

Are you psyco, or just retarted?? First, you claimed that he would be fired by jewish bosses because of his views. Ostensibly saying taht they would be intolerant of a view they disagreed with. (this just in, educated jews all over the world ask you to shut the fuck up and not speak on theirbehalf) When he brought out the example that he works for a jew, and the jew knows his views and the jew is accepting of his opinion, you come back with some angry rant about how jews give people the freedome to express their ideas.

Unlike your sexual orinentation, this is one thing you cannot have both ways.

And one more thing....dont forget about those gentiles all over the middle east whose petro dollars fund venture capatlist and top law firms all over the world.

Now, who works for who again?

213, 160 and 208 are not necessarily the same person, and thus can hold different views, including different generalizations and exceptions.

I don't think you're "retarted" but I do think you're retarded.

210/211: Relatively speaking, the UAE is a rather progressive and economically vibrant place. Ditto for Bahrain.

Both are also strong allies of the U.S. And this is a nice bonus--unlike Israel, they don't occupy other people for decades/systematically steal their land!

I would have mentioned Turkey, but every 10 years, they have a military coup to repress any momentum that the non-secular political parties build up. Not so fun.

Anyways, thanks for playing fucktard!

-205

203: sorry, you're confused about how morality works, but if someone is launching missiles at me from a civilian position like a school, I do not have a moral obligation to refrain from returning fire because the children will die. Assuming there's no other, less damaging, practical way to suppress the attacks launched from the school--and I don't see much of an argument for Israel having skipped over such an alternative means--only the aggressors are the "immoral bastards," and those firing back in self defense are victims. The aggressor has not only attacked their victims with rockets, the aggressor has forced them to kill innocents to survive.

Should I, say, announce ahead of time to said civilian population that letting people set up, stockpile, and/or fire weapons will result in the destruction of those areas--yes, if possible. As I understand it, that happened here. But nobody has an obligation to sit there and take it because a civilian population is being used, willingly or unwillingly, as a shield.

To the contrary, making exceptions for this conduct only encourages it. At best, Hamas threatens their lives if they don't let them fire rockets from their schools and mosques: they must fear to have them there more than they fear Hamas. At worst, they allow the emplacement because they sympathize with Hamas: their decision removes them from the realm of non-combatants.

204: yes, that's a severed arm. I've seen worse, believe it or not, because unlike you (in all liklihood) I haven't spent my entire life or career in NYC. The fact that it belongs to an innocent is terrible: but it wasn't the people defending themselves that really caused her death.

It was the animals who decided it was convienent--even helpful--to launch attacks on civilian targets from within a school. These aggressors not only seek to kill children on the other side, they welcome the death of their own children because they know that it promotes their cause. Don't make the mistake of claiming that all killing is morally equal--it's not.

215, I'm not too sure that the UAE and Bahrain are more democratic, progressive and open than Israel.

From the wikipedia entry for Bahrain:
"Bahrain has a bicameral legislature with ... an upper house, the Shura Council, appointed by the king.... what are termed "morality issues" have moved further up the political agenda with parties launching campaigns to impose bans on female mannequins displaying lingerie in shop windows, sorcery, and the hanging of underwear on washing lines, as well as change the building by laws to fit one-way glass to houses to prevent residents being able to see out....Women's political rights in Bahrain saw an important step forward when women were granted the right to vote and stand in national elections for the first time in the 2002 election. However, no women were elected to office in that year’s polls"

From the entry for Politics of the UAE:
"Although unofficial, the Presidency is de facto hereditary to the Al Nahyan clan of Abu Dhabi and the Premiership is hereditary to the Al-Maktoom clan of Dubai....The United Arab Emirates does not allow political parties."
Not to mention that UAE does not allow most of its residents to be citizens ever.

Yeah, real open democracies you just mentioned, much more so than Israel... Stop embarrassing yourself.

205/215, I'm pretty certain "the most democratic, open, and progressive nation in the Middle East" (your own quote) does not mean what you think it means.
Hint: when you have governing or appointive powers vested in a hereditary king/emir, you are probably less democratic than a country without hereditary rulers.

What happened to the Burris discussion people?

FOCUS!

219, the last shot fired in the Burris argument (see below) went unanswered.

201 Posted by guest | Permalink
Tuesday, January 6, 2009 4:31 PM

198: you see, I'm afraid you have it backwards. The state constitution states that the Governor appoints and the Sec. State certifies the appointment--if you'd like that to be read as requiring something less than the consent of the Sec. State, carry the burden. Otherwise, STFU.

The fact that he has the "right" not to certify the choice of the Governor is facially plain from the fact that his positive act is necessary for the appointment to be valid. He doesn't act--makes a decision not to act--and there's no valid appointment. He's made that decision, and there's no valid appointment.

The only way for that to be counteracted is (1) make the argument to a court for mandamus compelling the Sec. State to certify (i.e., you prove there is no right to refuse, not I prove that there is a right to refuse--burdens matter a lot), or (2) find a way to fire and replace the Sec State. Get it yet?

Dumbasses (217 & 218):

Back to the original point of discussion: can you show me some proof of either the UAE or Bahrain squelching foreign media? Because that's apparently accepted practice in Israel these days.

Can you show me proof of the UAE or Bahrain engaging in behavior that amounts to apartheid? Do they engage in collective punishment, like building walls around people that they occupy?

Can you show me proof of the UAE and Bahrain annexing land that isn't theirs, forcing innocent people to abandon their homes and businesses? (Israel did those things to my grandfather in 1948, when he was living and working in West Jerusalem.)

Can you show me proof of soldiers in the UAE and Bahrain arresting and indefinitely detaining shopkeepers that don't allow soldiers to steal merchandise from their stores? (This happened to my dad in the Old City of Jerusalem.)

Israel is great for Jewish people. It's a festering shithole for everyone else that lives there.

The UAE and Bahrain don't seem too shabby now, do they?

Suck my cock,
205/215

221, the issue is which country is "the most democratic, open, and progressive nation in the Middle East". The key words here, as 217 and 218 pointed out, are "democratic", "open" and "progressive." UAE and Bahrain are disqualified compared to Israel because they are not democratic (they are monarchies), they are not progressive (why did women only get the vote this decade?), and they are not open (open countries usually do not ban political parties).

The points you mentioned are completely irrelevant to the comparison.
The US has censored foreign media, annexed land, and built walls. That means Bahrain and the UAE are more open, democratic and progressive than the US, right? Ok whatever you say.

It's so funny that you claim Israel is great only for Jewish people, while praising UAE. Israeli Arabs can vote. Are you even aware of what UAE does to its foreign residents from Pakistan, etc? Denying them suffrage is the least of it.

205/215/221 = EPIC FAIL, ENGLISH READING COMPREHENSION PWNED

222 - Denying foreign nationals suffrage? Yes, that's unheard of in the democratic world. IDIOT!

As for the right-wing Zionist crap - please don't pretend to speak for the rest of us. You're embarrassing.

It's abhorrent to shell a civilian population, regardless of who is doing it. However, ask yourself this: How many Israeli civilians have been killed by Hamas rockets? How many Palestinian civilians have been killed by Israel's response? Pretty disproportionate, wouldn't you say?

Still, you're too busy foaming at the mouth to really think anything through. Israel is never going to find peace at the end of a gun barrel.

224, See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6182581.stm

"Only a tiny percentage of the population has been invited to vote at these elections. But the government has been keen to point out that this is a starting point on the route to broader political participation.
The voters, who number fewer than 7,000 men and women, have been selected by the rulers of the seven emirates which make up the UAE. This represents under 1% of Emirati citizens.
The criteria for selection have not been made clear, but they seem to be based on traditional forms of patronage. "

Yes 99% of _citizens_ disenfranchised, that is unheard of in the democratic world. But please keep on trying to tell us that this is what passes for the most open, democratic and progressive country in the Middle East. Let me help you dig the hole some more.

From wikipedia: "Specifically, the UAE does not have democratically elected institutions; citizens do not have the right to change their government or political parties."

And lovely how you're trying to change the subject, that's probably a good idea to reduce your embarrassment. I don't even see 222 claiming to speak for anyone else, so yes 223 is right, you are basic English reading comprehension pwned.

225 - yes, assuming that 224 was not my first post. Which it was.

My point on suffrage was in response to 222's apparent outrage that Pakistani's can't vote in the UAE.

As Samuel L. Jackson once said, when you make an assumption you make an ass out of u and umption.

Peace, numbnuts.

224

224/215, it was never your grandfather's land. He was merely occupying what had been taken from the jews by the Romans (who subsequentially transplanted the ancestors of the Palestinians to the land to ensure--get this--that the jews stayed displaced) many, many years before any of you uneducated curs got all hot under the collar.

History ftw.

222:

Bahrain is a constitutional monarchy, like England, Spain, and a number of other respected democracies.

227:

Your retardation is stunning. You're either a troll putting on a magnificent act, or the offspring of Trig Palin and a goat. For your sake, I'm hoping you're not the latter.

Also, a question: have you relinquished any American real property you own to a Native American tribe yet? Because, after all, you're merely "occupying" it, and don't have any right to it anyways.

Finally--this is great--you accuse my grandfather (God rest his soul) of being an occupier. Wow, I've seen blaming the victims before, but you've brought it to a new low. You think you're so smart!!! Turning the blackest of black eyes of the Jewish people--a 40 year occupation--right on its head! Good one!!!

You are an utter waste of space. Do a service to the rest of the world, and go play in some traffic.

215, etc

228, do the English and Spanish monarchs have the absolute power to appoint an entire legislative house that can and do completely veto any legislation without restriction, like the Bahrain king? Thanks.

But I'm glad to see you're no longer trying to laughably argue that the UAE is a democracy.

229: This pissing match is a pointless waste of time. Perhaps I painted with strokes that were too broad in my initial post. That doesn't take away from the basic point I was trying to make--that the Israeli state is far from perfect or innocent on a number of things we associate with free and open government, and has a human rights record that is much, much worse than quite a few of the other states in the Middle East. Whether you agree with that or not is your choice. In the meantime, you can feel free to suck on my chocolate salty balls.

215, etc

230, your basic point was that Israel is not the most open, democratic and progressive country in the Middle East, and that white people who think so are wrong. Which country is, then? The UAE?

If it makes you happy, none of them you dipshit.

215

232, "most" is a relative term and obviously implies an ordering comparison, so among the countries in the Middle East which one is the most open, democratic and progressive?