Why Are Republicans So Relentlessly Cruel to the Poor?

[Billo_Really]

Yes, and what all see are generalizations and not specifics. So give me one situation where Israel attacked the Palestinians for no reason at all, and then we can examine the entire event so I can show you how FOS you are and how Israel was only responding to an aggressive action by the terrorists that you love so much.


View attachment 121027



WTF does this have to do with fishing?

There you go! Now lets talk about it.

 

[Billo_Really]

You didn't limit it to 911, you made a broad idiotic statement and I countered.

No, I said if you look at the bombings in the last 30 years. So the limit was 30 years. If you want to count administration years during that 30:

• Bush 41 = 4
• Bush 43 = 8
• Obama = 8 (his foreign policy was the neocon agenda)

That's 2/3's of the 30 with republican foreign policy.

 

[Billo_Really]

You addressed each point but had nothing to say because you appear to know nothing but a few slogans you haven't even thought about. You are obviously one of these people who begins with an opinion and then works back to try to justify it, otherwise known as a bigot.

And all you're doing is attaching labels to things because you don't have a valid argument with which to rebut. I can talk in more detail about each point, but until you address them, there's no need to.

 

[Billo_Really]

So you know your "information" is NOT true but post it as FAKE NEWS anyway. I'd call that a lie, which is fine, we expect nothing more from you and you work hard to maintain that reputation.

You don't tell me what I know, I tell you. You're talking like a little shit troll trying to put words in my mouth and trying to frame this conversation into something it isn't.

His link had two reports that were over a million deaths. And the one you keep pointing to, one of its owners admitted that the numbers reflected about half the actual deaths.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes, and what all see are generalizations and not specifics. So give me one situation where Israel attacked the Palestinians for no reason at all, and then we can examine the entire event so I can show you how FOS you are and how Israel was only responding to an aggressive action by the terrorists that you love so much.


View attachment 121027



WTF does this have to do with fishing?

There you go! Now lets talk about it.

I have no idea what you're trying to pull here. It's a video with no information: no date, no story, no time, nothing....... But you posted it 5:00am EST, so you were probably drunk.

I took the liberty to try to find something on it, and here is what I found:

Shots were fired from the shore of a Gaza beach toward an Israeli Navy ship on Thursday during proceedings to arrest a Palestinian fisherman who had breached waters deemed illegal by Israel.

The Israeli forces stopped a fishing boat that had exceeded the permitted area for fishing off the northern coast of the Gaza Strip.

Shots fired at Israeli Navy during arrest of Palestinian fishermen

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ohhhh...now you admit knowing WMD's were found along with 550 tonnes of yellowcake?

Report: United States kept secret its chemical weapons finds in Iraq
By Dana Ford, CNN
Updated 6:14 PM ET, Wed October 15, 2014

The U.S. government suppressed information about chemical weapons it found in Iraq, and several servicemembers were injured by their exposure to those weapons, The New York Times is reporting.
In an article published late Tuesday, the newspaper says it found 17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers who were exposed to mustard or nerve agents after 2003. They were reportedly given inadequate care and told not to talk about what happened.

"From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein's rule.

"In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
[...]
Report: U.S. kept secret chemical weapons finds in Iraq - CNN.com

Those are not WMD's.

BTW, dimwit:

weapons of mass destruction
plural noun
1.
nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons that can cause indiscriminate death or injury on a large scale

the definition of weapons of mass destruction

weapons of mass destruction

weapon of mass destruction
n. pl. weapons of mass destruction
A weapon that can cause widespread destruction or kill large numbers of people, especially a nuclear, chemical, orbiological weapon.

weapons of mass destruction

• Definition of weapons of mass destruction

1. : weapons that can destroy entire cities, regions, etc.
   

Definition of WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

As usual, the English language has declared you a moron.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I drink regular domestic beer when I go out for karaoke or something. Otherwise, I only drink beer when I'm somewhere that has a really great specialty beer that I like, such as Founder's Rubaeus or Four Peaks Peach Ale.

Never heard of it but then I'm not much of a beer drinker. Even as a youth I didn't care for it but, if I did drink anything, it was a good dark beer with a meal.

Four Peaks is a brewery here in Arizona. I don't know how much they distribute outside the state, but in-state, they are hugely popular. They make a dark-amber Scottish-style ale called Kilt Lifter, which is their best-known product. Being a fan of fruit ales, I'm very partial to their peach ale.

Founder's Rubaeus is a raspberry ale that I just recently discovered. It's a dark garnet color, kinda pricey and therefore sold on-tap in a glass that looks like a small brandy snifter rather than a pint glass, and has a head that's so smooth, it's almost as though they put whipped cream on top.

I also enjoy going to SCA events and sampling the beers made by the brewing enthusiasts who are members of the group. Almost no one makes the thin, yellow stuff that passes for beer here in the US, so you get an amazing variety of rich ambers and darks. The range of creativity available in it is just amazing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Those are not WMD's.

Really? Since when?

Since he's a leftist, and completely unfamiliar with the idea that words have actual set meanings.

 

[Billo_Really]

I have no idea what you're trying to pull here. It's a video with no information: no date, no story, no time, nothing....... But you posted it 5:00am EST, so you were probably drunk.

I took the liberty to try to find something on it, and here is what I found:

Shots were fired from the shore of a Gaza beach toward an Israeli Navy ship on Thursday during proceedings to arrest a Palestinian fisherman who had breached waters deemed illegal by Israel.

The Israeli forces stopped a fishing boat that had exceeded the permitted area for fishing off the northern coast of the Gaza Strip.

Shots fired at Israeli Navy during arrest of Palestinian fishermen

There is nothing you could say that would justify shooting at people fishing. Israel has no authority to limit Palestinian fishermen in Palestinian territorial waters. That's like you walking across the street and telling me that I could only water half of my front lawn. If you tried to do that, what do you think my reaction is going to be? I'd ask you the same question, but you already demonstrated being void of any empathy towards the poor and are unable to put the shoe on the other foot, so I won't.

What you see in the video is people fishing and an Israeli gunboat opening up on them with a 50 cal. It's also a little strange that if someone did shoot at the Israeli's from the shore, the Israeli's would respond by shooting at the BOAT, instead of shooting at the people who were shooting at them. But this is a moot point. They were in Palestinian territorial waters and Israel has no jurisdiction anywhere except Israel.

 

[Billo_Really]

Since he's a leftist, and completely unfamiliar with the idea that words have actual set meanings.

And if you knew what those meanings were, you would've stated them, instead of trying to make this about me. But that's not what trolls do. And you are a troll.

According to the US government on what was found in the desert in Iraq...

"All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them."
​

Weapons of MASS Destruction do not disperse over a limited area, they disperse over a MASS area, dumbass!

 

[Billo_Really]

BTW, dimwit:

weapons of mass destruction
plural noun
1.
nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons that can cause indiscriminate death or injury on a large scale

the definition of weapons of mass destruction

weapons of mass destruction

weapon of mass destruction
n. pl. weapons of mass destruction
A weapon that can cause widespread destruction or kill large numbers of people, especially a nuclear, chemical, orbiological weapon.

weapons of mass destruction

• 
  
  
  • Definition of weapons of mass destruction

1. 
   
   
   • : weapons that can destroy entire cities, regions, etc.

Definition of WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

As usual, the English language has declared you a moron.

And none of that apply's to what was found in the desert.

 

[Billo_Really]

There is one thing this thread is showing after 300 webpages, that the right is completely void of any empathy towards anyone and not just the poor. Now the question is, what is causing this severe lack of humanity in the right?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I have no idea what you're trying to pull here. It's a video with no information: no date, no story, no time, nothing....... But you posted it 5:00am EST, so you were probably drunk.

I took the liberty to try to find something on it, and here is what I found:

Shots were fired from the shore of a Gaza beach toward an Israeli Navy ship on Thursday during proceedings to arrest a Palestinian fisherman who had breached waters deemed illegal by Israel.

The Israeli forces stopped a fishing boat that had exceeded the permitted area for fishing off the northern coast of the Gaza Strip.

Shots fired at Israeli Navy during arrest of Palestinian fishermen

There is nothing you could say that would justify shooting at people fishing. Israel has no authority to limit Palestinian fishermen in Palestinian territorial waters. That's like you walking across the street and telling me that I could only water half of my front lawn. If you tried to do that, what do you think my reaction is going to be? I'd ask you the same question, but you already demonstrated being void of any empathy towards the poor and are unable to put the shoe on the other foot, so I won't.

What you see in the video is people fishing and an Israeli gunboat opening up on them with a 50 cal. It's also a little strange that if someone did shoot at the Israeli's from the shore, the Israeli's would respond by shooting at the BOAT, instead of shooting at the people who were shooting at them. But this is a moot point. They were in Palestinian territorial waters and Israel has no jurisdiction anywhere except Israel.

Apparently they do have the right to restrict whoever they want.. Plus I asked you for an Israeli attack that was unprovoked, and you give me some stupid fishing story.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You addressed each point but had nothing to say because you appear to know nothing but a few slogans you haven't even thought about. You are obviously one of these people who begins with an opinion and then works back to try to justify it, otherwise known as a bigot.

And all you're doing is attaching labels to things because you don't have a valid argument with which to rebut. I can talk in more detail about each point, but until you address them, there's no need to.

Bullshit, I presented arguments and you presented nothing but a few slogans. You didn't argue in detail because you clearly are too ignorant of the fact to be able to present an argument based on facts and logic.

 

[Billo_Really]

Apparently they do have the right to restrict whoever they want.. Plus I asked you for an Israeli attack that was unprovoked, and you give me some stupid fishing story.

No they don't have the right. They can do it for the same reason a dog licks its balls.

BTW, that was an unprovoked attack.

 

[Billo_Really]

Bullshit, I presented arguments and you presented nothing but a few slogans. You didn't argue in detail because you clearly are too ignorant of the fact to be able to present an argument based on facts and logic.

Okay, pencils down and eyes to the front of the class...

...you said there was no occupation and I said there was and when it started. Why is it not a slogan with you saying there was no occupation and it is a slogan when I said there is an occupation? Especially after I provided additional information as to when it started, which is definitely not a slogan, but a fact.

You, like the other trolls, keep trying to make this about me, which it isn't. But since all of you have no valid arguments, attacking me is all you got.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Bullshit, I presented arguments and you presented nothing but a few slogans. You didn't argue in detail because you clearly are too ignorant of the fact to be able to present an argument based on facts and logic.

Okay, pencils down and eyes to the front of the class...

...you said there was no occupation and I said there was and when it started. Why is it not a slogan with you saying there was no occupation and it is a slogan when I said there is an occupation? Especially after I provided additional information as to when it started, which is definitely not a slogan, but a fact.

You, like the other trolls, keep trying to make this about me, which it isn't. But since all of you have no valid arguments, attacking me is all you got.

I explained to you that since nearly all the Palestinians live under their own governments, PA or Hamas, there is no occupation. The division of the land into areas A, B and C, with PA civil and security jurisdiction in area A, PA civil and joint PA Israel security jurisdiction in B and Israeli civil and security jurisdiction in area C, in the West Bank and Gaza was agreed on in negotiations between Israel and the PLO and was endorsed by the UN, US and EU in the 1990's. Negotiations stalled because agreement could not be reached on various issues, so while there are grievances and disputes, there is no basis in fact or logic for calling the current situation an occupation. It is a word you use for its emotional impact not because the is a legitimate basis for it.

 

[thanatos144]

Here's your typical repub

View attachment 120909

Because we should not vet people coming in to this country???? Again a stupid argument. WE are not killing those babies you liberals are

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Apparently they do have the right to restrict whoever they want.. Plus I asked you for an Israeli attack that was unprovoked, and you give me some stupid fishing story.

No they don't have the right. They can do it for the same reason a dog licks its balls.

BTW, that was an unprovoked attack.

No, if they have water restrictions and some Palestinians decide they are going to violate those restrictions, that is a provoked attack.

 

[Papageorgio]

You didn't limit it to 911, you made a broad idiotic statement and I countered.

No, I said if you look at the bombings in the last 30 years. So the limit was 30 years. If you want to count administration years during that 30:

• Bush 41 = 4
• Bush 43 = 8
• Obama = 8 (his foreign policy was the neocon agenda)

That's 2/3's of the 30 with republican foreign policy.

You forget Bill Clinton: Sudan, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan. So now it's 50/50.