| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
26 Jul 2006 02:29:11 PM |
| Object: |
16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
Sick bastards.
23 July 2006
EXCLUSIVE: HANGED FROM A CRANE AGED 16
EXCLUSIVE JUSTICE IRAN STYLE: SICK GIRL EXECUTED BY JUDGE SHE DEFIED
Her crime? She had sex with an unmarried man
By Susie Boniface
IT WAS exactly 6am and the start of another blisteringly hot summer
day when 16-year-old Atefeh Rajabi was dragged from her prison cell
and taken to be executed.
Every step of the way the troubled teenager plagued by mental problems
shouted "repentance, repentance" as the militiamen marched her to the
town's Railway Square.
The Iranian judge who had sentenced Atefeh to death was left unmoved
as he personally put the noose around her neck and signalled to the
crane driver.
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid%3D17431866&method%3Dfull&siteid%3D62484&headline%3Dhanged-from-a-crane-aged-16--name_page.html
atheist@home#1554
.
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 07:27:43 PM |
|
|
On 29 Jul 2006 22:01:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980FC11FF8E43fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:rcinc2p97qbv9evn1itpgmleh0ap2p1d7j@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 18:27:05 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F9CB6BFEA3fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:am1nc21v8qlibo4hmdhevahjkgk5h52dhn@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 14:38:19 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F75EC2EB95fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5trmc21h7c56r4q5jn6l7698el824p7c29@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:31:58 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F5653B8BEEfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:22glc25dccpnahichksjl96qfs5i8f79t5@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 00:21:40 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980ED8D72E923fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in
news:4jblc21pn28g15r2ag06os30qdk9glt59d@4ax.com:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 07:53:46 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:00:11 -0400, IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com>
wrote:
- Refer:
<05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-media.phx>
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
<Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has
no ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as
their tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar
military budget. People who can't afford laser-guided
bombs, up-armored Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I
haven't adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain
sort of ideology to use terrorism as a tactic in warfare.
The sort of ideology that doesn't distinguish between
civilians and military personell as targets. You know, like
you liberals cretins with your moral equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster
bombs being dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
Bringing Freedom & Democracy, apparently...
Come on, guys. If you keep this up, you might force Fred to
actually think, and then who knows what might happen? <G>
I don't see anything resembling an answer to my comment about
ideology above. That snark about cluster bombs didn't involve
any thought on your side, so why should I have to think about it
either?
It's not a 'snark', Fred. Dropping cluster bombs on urban
Baghdad was a deliberate act of NOT discriminating between
civilian and military targets (what you claim is the ideology of
terrorism), so why are you excusing it? Is it anything deeper
than that the act was committed by an agency you approve of?
Stop trying to change the subject. I'm still waiting for your
answer.
Answer what? I've explained my question. It's perfectly valid but
you seem to be trying very hard to avoid it.
You dodged *my* point about terrorist ideologies being the ones that
make no distiction at all between military and civilians. Our
military go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. Our enemy
in Iraq go out of their way to *cause* civilian casualties.
You may now proceed to twist logic to the breaking point to make it
out that our targeting of military installations that were
deliberately placed in a city by the enemy is the same as that same
enemy running a suicide bomber into a crowd.
Dropping cluster munitions isn't 'targeting' anything, and your
ad-hom attacks aren't doing anything to make your point valid. In
fact, just the opposite.
Yes, cluster munitions *target* an area.
As does an IED by your chopped logic. Try again?
Nope, sorry, wrong.
And don't whine, your emotionalism doesn't make up for your twisted
logic and abhorrent moral equivalences.
Ah, more insults in place of reasoning. Oh, well.
Nope, sorry, wrong.
So, again: when the US dropped unguided cluster bombs throughout
Baghdad, how was that different from what you say is an 'ideology
of terrorism' in not discriminating between civilians and military
personel?
Our targeting is a lot more precise than you imply.
One cluster bomb scatters anti-personnel submunitions over an area
larger than a football field. That's exactly what they're designed
to do. Cluster bombs were dropped into urban areas where civilians
live. That doesn't look like precise to me. In fact, it looks like
sowing booby-traps among civilians.
What it looks like to you is not relevant. Your emotionalism is not
relevant either. The pattern put down by a cluster bomb is *very*
precise.
Not in a city, it isn't. It is an indiscriminate anti-personnel
weapon. If you can make a reply to these points without lapsing into
insults, this is a good place for it.
Yes, even in a city, it is. I've been replying to these points of yours.
You just keep repeating the same thing over and over after I answer you.
If it was determined that there was a target of military
significance in an area, then a cluster bomb is a good way to prevent
the enemy from using that area. If the enemy puts civilians at risk by
citing his military installations in his cities, that's not *our*
problem.
So, yes, blowing up civilians is repugnant. I'm wondering when it
became less repugnant in your opinion when the US does it.
The question is why those civilians were in an area with military
significance. We don't just drop bombs for the fun of it.
More excuses, there. You use 'moral equivalence' as an insult but
you're applying exactly that to the actions of the US military.
No, I'm not. You're twisting and turning but you're not having the
desired effect.
Please don't give me 'Baghdad was a military target' again - the
entire city was not one big encampment.
They didn't drop bombs all over the city. They were targeted on
military buildings. It's not our fault that Saddam put his bunkers
and other installations in and around residential areas. That's what
you get when you put terrorists in charge.
Cluster bombs ARE NOT TARGETED MUNITIONS. They are designed to kill
and maim indiscriminately over a large area.
Sorry, but using the word "indiscriminate" to describe an area-denial
weapon doesn't make it so. Neither do the CAPITAL LETTERS.
And yet the fact remains. Your definition of 'targeting' applies to
the IEDs being used by insurgents. Did you mean to do that?
No, it does not apply to the IED's being used by the terrorists.
Ah, finally. Half an answer.
Now, why not?
[snip]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 07:02:32 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 29 Jul 2006 22:01:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980FC11FF8E43fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:rcinc2p97qbv9evn1itpgmleh0ap2p1d7j@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 18:27:05 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F9CB6BFEA3fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:am1nc21v8qlibo4hmdhevahjkgk5h52dhn@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 14:38:19 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F75EC2EB95fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5trmc21h7c56r4q5jn6l7698el824p7c29@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:31:58 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F5653B8BEEfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:22glc25dccpnahichksjl96qfs5i8f79t5@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 00:21:40 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
<Xns980ED8D72E923fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in
news:4jblc21pn28g15r2ag06os30qdk9glt59d@4ax.com:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 07:53:46 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:00:11 -0400, IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com>
wrote:
- Refer:
<05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-
media.phx>
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
<Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It
has no ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as
their tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar
military budget. People who can't afford laser-guided
bombs, up-armored Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I
haven't adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain
sort of ideology to use terrorism as a tactic in warfare.
The sort of ideology that doesn't distinguish between
civilians and military personell as targets. You know,
like you liberals cretins with your moral equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster
bombs being dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
Bringing Freedom & Democracy, apparently...
Come on, guys. If you keep this up, you might force Fred to
actually think, and then who knows what might happen? <G>
I don't see anything resembling an answer to my comment about
ideology above. That snark about cluster bombs didn't involve
any thought on your side, so why should I have to think about
it either?
It's not a 'snark', Fred. Dropping cluster bombs on urban
Baghdad was a deliberate act of NOT discriminating between
civilian and military targets (what you claim is the ideology
of terrorism), so why are you excusing it? Is it anything
deeper than that the act was committed by an agency you
approve of?
Stop trying to change the subject. I'm still waiting for your
answer.
Answer what? I've explained my question. It's perfectly valid
but you seem to be trying very hard to avoid it.
You dodged *my* point about terrorist ideologies being the ones
that make no distiction at all between military and civilians. Our
military go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. Our
enemy in Iraq go out of their way to *cause* civilian casualties.
You may now proceed to twist logic to the breaking point to make
it out that our targeting of military installations that were
deliberately placed in a city by the enemy is the same as that
same enemy running a suicide bomber into a crowd.
Dropping cluster munitions isn't 'targeting' anything, and your
ad-hom attacks aren't doing anything to make your point valid. In
fact, just the opposite.
Yes, cluster munitions *target* an area.
As does an IED by your chopped logic. Try again?
Nope, sorry, wrong.
And don't whine, your emotionalism doesn't make up for your twisted
logic and abhorrent moral equivalences.
Ah, more insults in place of reasoning. Oh, well.
Nope, sorry, wrong.
So, again: when the US dropped unguided cluster bombs throughout
Baghdad, how was that different from what you say is an
'ideology of terrorism' in not discriminating between civilians
and military personel?
Our targeting is a lot more precise than you imply.
One cluster bomb scatters anti-personnel submunitions over an area
larger than a football field. That's exactly what they're designed
to do. Cluster bombs were dropped into urban areas where civilians
live. That doesn't look like precise to me. In fact, it looks like
sowing booby-traps among civilians.
What it looks like to you is not relevant. Your emotionalism is not
relevant either. The pattern put down by a cluster bomb is *very*
precise.
Not in a city, it isn't. It is an indiscriminate anti-personnel
weapon. If you can make a reply to these points without lapsing into
insults, this is a good place for it.
Yes, even in a city, it is. I've been replying to these points of
yours. You just keep repeating the same thing over and over after I
answer you.
If it was determined that there was a target of military
significance in an area, then a cluster bomb is a good way to
prevent the enemy from using that area. If the enemy puts civilians
at risk by citing his military installations in his cities, that's
not *our* problem.
So, yes, blowing up civilians is repugnant. I'm wondering when it
became less repugnant in your opinion when the US does it.
The question is why those civilians were in an area with military
significance. We don't just drop bombs for the fun of it.
More excuses, there. You use 'moral equivalence' as an insult but
you're applying exactly that to the actions of the US military.
No, I'm not. You're twisting and turning but you're not having the
desired effect.
Please don't give me 'Baghdad was a military target' again - the
entire city was not one big encampment.
They didn't drop bombs all over the city. They were targeted on
military buildings. It's not our fault that Saddam put his bunkers
and other installations in and around residential areas. That's
what you get when you put terrorists in charge.
Cluster bombs ARE NOT TARGETED MUNITIONS. They are designed to
kill and maim indiscriminately over a large area.
Sorry, but using the word "indiscriminate" to describe an
area-denial weapon doesn't make it so. Neither do the CAPITAL
LETTERS.
And yet the fact remains. Your definition of 'targeting' applies to
the IEDs being used by insurgents. Did you mean to do that?
No, it does not apply to the IED's being used by the terrorists.
Ah, finally. Half an answer.
Now, why not?
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 09:21:48 AM |
|
|
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 29 Jul 2006 22:01:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980FC11FF8E43fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:rcinc2p97qbv9evn1itpgmleh0ap2p1d7j@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 18:27:05 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F9CB6BFEA3fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:am1nc21v8qlibo4hmdhevahjkgk5h52dhn@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 14:38:19 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F75EC2EB95fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5trmc21h7c56r4q5jn6l7698el824p7c29@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:31:58 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F5653B8BEEfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:22glc25dccpnahichksjl96qfs5i8f79t5@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 00:21:40 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
<Xns980ED8D72E923fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in
news:4jblc21pn28g15r2ag06os30qdk9glt59d@4ax.com:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 07:53:46 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:00:11 -0400, IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com>
wrote:
- Refer:
<05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-
media.phx>
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
<Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It
has no ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as
their tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar
military budget. People who can't afford laser-guided
bombs, up-armored Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I
haven't adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain
sort of ideology to use terrorism as a tactic in warfare.
The sort of ideology that doesn't distinguish between
civilians and military personell as targets. You know,
like you liberals cretins with your moral equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster
bombs being dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
Bringing Freedom & Democracy, apparently...
Come on, guys. If you keep this up, you might force Fred to
actually think, and then who knows what might happen? <G>
I don't see anything resembling an answer to my comment about
ideology above. That snark about cluster bombs didn't involve
any thought on your side, so why should I have to think about
it either?
It's not a 'snark', Fred. Dropping cluster bombs on urban
Baghdad was a deliberate act of NOT discriminating between
civilian and military targets (what you claim is the ideology
of terrorism), so why are you excusing it? Is it anything
deeper than that the act was committed by an agency you
approve of?
Stop trying to change the subject. I'm still waiting for your
answer.
Answer what? I've explained my question. It's perfectly valid
but you seem to be trying very hard to avoid it.
You dodged *my* point about terrorist ideologies being the ones
that make no distiction at all between military and civilians. Our
military go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. Our
enemy in Iraq go out of their way to *cause* civilian casualties.
You may now proceed to twist logic to the breaking point to make
it out that our targeting of military installations that were
deliberately placed in a city by the enemy is the same as that
same enemy running a suicide bomber into a crowd.
Dropping cluster munitions isn't 'targeting' anything, and your
ad-hom attacks aren't doing anything to make your point valid. In
fact, just the opposite.
Yes, cluster munitions *target* an area.
As does an IED by your chopped logic. Try again?
Nope, sorry, wrong.
And don't whine, your emotionalism doesn't make up for your twisted
logic and abhorrent moral equivalences.
Ah, more insults in place of reasoning. Oh, well.
Nope, sorry, wrong.
So, again: when the US dropped unguided cluster bombs throughout
Baghdad, how was that different from what you say is an
'ideology of terrorism' in not discriminating between civilians
and military personel?
Our targeting is a lot more precise than you imply.
One cluster bomb scatters anti-personnel submunitions over an area
larger than a football field. That's exactly what they're designed
to do. Cluster bombs were dropped into urban areas where civilians
live. That doesn't look like precise to me. In fact, it looks like
sowing booby-traps among civilians.
What it looks like to you is not relevant. Your emotionalism is not
relevant either. The pattern put down by a cluster bomb is *very*
precise.
Not in a city, it isn't. It is an indiscriminate anti-personnel
weapon. If you can make a reply to these points without lapsing into
insults, this is a good place for it.
Yes, even in a city, it is. I've been replying to these points of
yours. You just keep repeating the same thing over and over after I
answer you.
If it was determined that there was a target of military
significance in an area, then a cluster bomb is a good way to
prevent the enemy from using that area. If the enemy puts civilians
at risk by citing his military installations in his cities, that's
not *our* problem.
So, yes, blowing up civilians is repugnant. I'm wondering when it
became less repugnant in your opinion when the US does it.
The question is why those civilians were in an area with military
significance. We don't just drop bombs for the fun of it.
More excuses, there. You use 'moral equivalence' as an insult but
you're applying exactly that to the actions of the US military.
No, I'm not. You're twisting and turning but you're not having the
desired effect.
Please don't give me 'Baghdad was a military target' again - the
entire city was not one big encampment.
They didn't drop bombs all over the city. They were targeted on
military buildings. It's not our fault that Saddam put his bunkers
and other installations in and around residential areas. That's
what you get when you put terrorists in charge.
Cluster bombs ARE NOT TARGETED MUNITIONS. They are designed to
kill and maim indiscriminately over a large area.
Sorry, but using the word "indiscriminate" to describe an
area-denial weapon doesn't make it so. Neither do the CAPITAL
LETTERS.
And yet the fact remains. Your definition of 'targeting' applies to
the IEDs being used by insurgents. Did you mean to do that?
No, it does not apply to the IED's being used by the terrorists.
Ah, finally. Half an answer.
Now, why not?
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending on who
does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 08:37:50 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:21gpc21oot60070le9174fi55i89mqaado@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
So you choose not to address any substantive answer to your questions.
Nice of you to concede so gracefully.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending on who
does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
Since you snipped and ran, we'll go with, you'll run like a cowardly
liberal (but that's redundant), and keep on lying your ***** off.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 09:45:57 AM |
|
|
On 30 Jul 2006 13:37:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98106BAB19A60fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:21gpc21oot60070le9174fi55i89mqaado@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
So you choose not to address any substantive answer to your questions.
Nice of you to concede so gracefully.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending on who
does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
Since you snipped and ran, we'll go with, you'll run like a cowardly
liberal (but that's redundant), and keep on lying your ***** off.
If that's what you need to keep yourself happy. I notice that you snip
(without marking) and that seems to be okay by you.
It's different when you do it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 11:25:38 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:kfhpc2lb7atnue9feam31041b3fum8pgks@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 13:37:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98106BAB19A60fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:21gpc21oot60070le9174fi55i89mqaado@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
So you choose not to address any substantive answer to your questions.
Nice of you to concede so gracefully.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending on
who does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
Since you snipped and ran, we'll go with, you'll run like a cowardly
liberal (but that's redundant), and keep on lying your ***** off.
If that's what you need to keep yourself happy. I notice that you snip
(without marking) and that seems to be okay by you.
You're a useless troll.
It's different when you do it?
You're a useless troll.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 12:24:54 PM |
|
|
On 30 Jul 2006 16:25:38 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns9810881E7622Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:kfhpc2lb7atnue9feam31041b3fum8pgks@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 13:37:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98106BAB19A60fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:21gpc21oot60070le9174fi55i89mqaado@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
So you choose not to address any substantive answer to your questions.
Nice of you to concede so gracefully.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending on
who does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
Since you snipped and ran, we'll go with, you'll run like a cowardly
liberal (but that's redundant), and keep on lying your ***** off.
If that's what you need to keep yourself happy. I notice that you snip
(without marking) and that seems to be okay by you.
You're a useless troll.
It's different when you do it?
You're a useless troll.
Just out of curiousity, is there any time when you can answer
questions relevantly and civilly?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 11:43:17 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:upqpc29bl5qhvgqqks1slpiu7ta57mphpj@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 16:25:38 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns9810881E7622Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:kfhpc2lb7atnue9feam31041b3fum8pgks@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 13:37:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98106BAB19A60fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:21gpc21oot60070le9174fi55i89mqaado@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
So you choose not to address any substantive answer to your
questions. Nice of you to concede so gracefully.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending on
who does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
Since you snipped and ran, we'll go with, you'll run like a cowardly
liberal (but that's redundant), and keep on lying your ***** off.
If that's what you need to keep yourself happy. I notice that you
snip (without marking) and that seems to be okay by you.
You're a useless troll.
It's different when you do it?
You're a useless troll.
Just out of curiousity, is there any time when you can answer
questions relevantly and civilly?
Why the ***** do you care?
You won't pay any fucking attention to the answer anyway.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 12:56:34 PM |
|
|
On 30 Jul 2006 16:43:17 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98108B1C713D4fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:upqpc29bl5qhvgqqks1slpiu7ta57mphpj@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 16:25:38 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns9810881E7622Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:kfhpc2lb7atnue9feam31041b3fum8pgks@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 13:37:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98106BAB19A60fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:21gpc21oot60070le9174fi55i89mqaado@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
So you choose not to address any substantive answer to your
questions. Nice of you to concede so gracefully.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending on
who does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
Since you snipped and ran, we'll go with, you'll run like a cowardly
liberal (but that's redundant), and keep on lying your ***** off.
If that's what you need to keep yourself happy. I notice that you
snip (without marking) and that seems to be okay by you.
You're a useless troll.
It's different when you do it?
You're a useless troll.
Just out of curiousity, is there any time when you can answer
questions relevantly and civilly?
Why the ***** do you care?
You won't pay any fucking attention to the answer anyway.
We can't know that, can we, until you answer the question for real
instead of simply declaring that you have whilst you avoid it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 12:23:32 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ikspc2589a8ds1caka3nfbrmn2l1b36nvg@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 16:43:17 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns98108B1C713D4fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:upqpc29bl5qhvgqqks1slpiu7ta57mphpj@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 16:25:38 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns9810881E7622Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:kfhpc2lb7atnue9feam31041b3fum8pgks@4ax.com:
On 30 Jul 2006 13:37:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98106BAB19A60fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:21gpc21oot60070le9174fi55i89mqaado@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 30 Jul 2006 12:02:32 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns98105B815DF04fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:07vnc25g0a4pbdcu862pp011noppl63330@fe06.highwinds-
media.phx:
[snip]
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you.
I'm onto your game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition
of snipping out what I choose not to address.
So you choose not to address any substantive answer to your
questions. Nice of you to concede so gracefully.
I suppose we'll just go with, for you, it's different depending
on who does it. AFAICT that's summed up your position on this.
Since you snipped and ran, we'll go with, you'll run like a
cowardly liberal (but that's redundant), and keep on lying your
***** off.
If that's what you need to keep yourself happy. I notice that you
snip (without marking) and that seems to be okay by you.
You're a useless troll.
It's different when you do it?
You're a useless troll.
Just out of curiousity, is there any time when you can answer
questions relevantly and civilly?
Why the ***** do you care?
You won't pay any fucking attention to the answer anyway.
We can't know that, can we, until you answer the question for real
instead of simply declaring that you have whilst you avoid it.
***** you. There's your answer. Now print it out on nice shiny paper,
fold it up nice and small and stuff it up your *****.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 12:04:29 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you. I'm onto your
game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
Freddie doesn't like it when mean people snip his answers, so he throws
a tantrum. Happens all the time.
Don't worry, he'll quickly get over it...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 11:25:52 AM |
|
|
(Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hja8ph.1xxria77jrbzrN%:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Since you're just going to snip my answers, ***** you. I'm onto your
game now, *****.
My, what a tantrum over a perfectly acceptable usenet tradition of
snipping out what I choose not to address.
Freddie doesn't like it when mean people snip his answers, so he throws
a tantrum. Happens all the time.
Don't worry, he'll quickly get over it...
You're a useless troll too.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 07:57:08 PM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
And yet the fact remains. Your definition of 'targeting' applies to
the IEDs being used by insurgents. Did you mean to do that?
No, it does not apply to the IED's being used by the terrorists.
Ah, finally. Half an answer.
Now, why not?
Why not indeed, especially those triggered at *specific* military targets?
[snip]
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 06:32:50 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as their
tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs, up-armored
Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of ideology to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology that
doesn't distinguish between civilians and military personell as
targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with your moral
equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of indiscriminate
bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not at all like
terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between civilian
and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 12:04:28 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between civilian
and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
So, declare an entire city of six million people a "military target" and
then there are no civilian casualities.
Problem solved!
(Hey, it worked with Dresden and Hiroshima, didn't it?)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 09:24:28 AM |
|
|
On 29 Jul 2006 11:32:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F56792CD18fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as their
tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs, up-armored
Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of ideology to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology that
doesn't distinguish between civilians and military personell as
targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with your moral
equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of indiscriminate
bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not at all like
terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between civilian
and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
That's just apologism. It's a simple question, really. All I'm asking
is why you excuse behaviour from the US that you condemn when that
self-same behaviour is exhibited by others.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 09:41:18 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5qrmc2dgg8ge8fm6hei3c48e1bajnbcfot@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:32:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F56792CD18fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as their
tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs, up-armored
Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of ideology
to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology that
doesn't distinguish between civilians and military personell as
targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with your moral
equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs
being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of indiscriminate
bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not at all like
terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between civilian
and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
That's just apologism. It's a simple question, really. All I'm asking
is why you excuse behaviour from the US that you condemn when that
self-same behaviour is exhibited by others.
That's just *your* apologism. You excuse the terrorists for using their
indiscriminate tactics, but you want to condemn the US for being
infinitely more discriminating about the difference between civilians
and military.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 11:03:15 AM |
|
|
On 29 Jul 2006 14:41:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F766E9BB31fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5qrmc2dgg8ge8fm6hei3c48e1bajnbcfot@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:32:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F56792CD18fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as their
tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs, up-armored
Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of ideology
to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology that
doesn't distinguish between civilians and military personell as
targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with your moral
equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs
being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of indiscriminate
bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not at all like
terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between civilian
and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
That's just apologism. It's a simple question, really. All I'm asking
is why you excuse behaviour from the US that you condemn when that
self-same behaviour is exhibited by others.
That's just *your* apologism. You excuse the terrorists for using their
indiscriminate tactics, but you want to condemn the US for being
infinitely more discriminating about the difference between civilians
and military.
Hmm. I see that there's only one being civil in this exchange now, and
it ain't you.
Since I have not 'excused' anybody, WTF are you talking about? When
the US uses the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that you condemn
in others, why is it suddenly okay?
It seems that you REALLY don't want to answer that question.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 01:15:58 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ih1nc21tl111bjk0okutjtk3nkcr2008cp@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 14:41:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F766E9BB31fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5qrmc2dgg8ge8fm6hei3c48e1bajnbcfot@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:32:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F56792CD18fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as their
tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs, up-armored
Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of
ideology
to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology that
doesn't distinguish between civilians and military personell as
targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with your moral
equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs
being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of indiscriminate
bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not at all like
terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between
civilian and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
That's just apologism. It's a simple question, really. All I'm
asking is why you excuse behaviour from the US that you condemn when
that self-same behaviour is exhibited by others.
That's just *your* apologism. You excuse the terrorists for using
their indiscriminate tactics, but you want to condemn the US for being
infinitely more discriminating about the difference between civilians
and military.
Hmm. I see that there's only one being civil in this exchange now, and
it ain't you.
Since I have not 'excused' anybody, WTF are you talking about? When
the US uses the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that you condemn
in others, why is it suddenly okay?
Yes, you are trying to excuse somebody, since you're trying to make
believe that the US is "just as bad" as the people we're trying to stop.
It seems that you REALLY don't want to answer that question.
The US does not use the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that I
condemn in others.
How many times do I have to answer your question before you acknowledge
that I have answered it?
Why do you keep asking stupid questions if you don't want to be treated
like you're asking stupid questions?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 12:04:28 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
The US does not use the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that I
condemn in others.
No, of course you don't. That's because you're comfortable with double
standards of morality, and because you truly believe might makes right.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
30 Jul 2006 11:26:58 AM |
|
|
(Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hja8ar.1oiyqc8qllgqoN%:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
The US does not use the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that I
condemn in others.
No, of course you don't. That's because you're comfortable with double
standards of morality, and because you truly believe might makes right.
You're a useless troll too.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 02:24:21 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
<snip>
Yes, you are trying to excuse somebody, since you're trying to make
believe that the US is "just as bad" as the people we're trying to
stop.
It seems that you REALLY don't want to answer that question.
The US does not use the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that I
condemn in others.
How many times do I have to answer your question before you
acknowledge that I have answered it?
Once.
Cluster bombing is certainly not the same as an IED.
But this "war" you gloat over was intended to free the people.
Maybe your idea of freedom is death.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 03:48:09 PM |
|
|
On 29 Jul 2006 18:15:58 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F9AD43B8F8fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ih1nc21tl111bjk0okutjtk3nkcr2008cp@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 14:41:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F766E9BB31fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5qrmc2dgg8ge8fm6hei3c48e1bajnbcfot@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:32:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F56792CD18fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as their
tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs, up-armored
Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of
ideology
to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology that
doesn't distinguish between civilians and military personell as
targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with your moral
equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs
being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of indiscriminate
bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not at all like
terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between
civilian and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
That's just apologism. It's a simple question, really. All I'm
asking is why you excuse behaviour from the US that you condemn when
that self-same behaviour is exhibited by others.
That's just *your* apologism. You excuse the terrorists for using
their indiscriminate tactics, but you want to condemn the US for being
infinitely more discriminating about the difference between civilians
and military.
Hmm. I see that there's only one being civil in this exchange now, and
it ain't you.
Since I have not 'excused' anybody, WTF are you talking about? When
the US uses the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that you condemn
in others, why is it suddenly okay?
Yes, you are trying to excuse somebody, since you're trying to make
believe that the US is "just as bad" as the people we're trying to stop.
Nope, that's just you reading something that isn't there. Not once
have I made that claim or comparison. Why do you feel the need to say
that I have?
It seems that you REALLY don't want to answer that question.
The US does not use the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that I
condemn in others.
Again, that's just you avoiding the question.
How many times do I have to answer your question before you acknowledge
that I have answered it?
You have not answered it. Instead you've simply denied that the US has
used indiscriminate tactics that you pretend to abhor in others.
Why do you keep asking stupid questions if you don't want to be treated
like you're asking stupid questions?
Your ad-hom attacks only emphasize your inability to converse
effectually, you know?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 03:09:29 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:18inc2p0pf41d93aob2m5l1lq6iceg3l3v@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 18:15:58 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F9AD43B8F8fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ih1nc21tl111bjk0okutjtk3nkcr2008cp@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 14:41:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F766E9BB31fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5qrmc2dgg8ge8fm6hei3c48e1bajnbcfot@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:32:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F56792CD18fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-
media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
<Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as
their tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs,
up-armored Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of
ideology
to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology
that doesn't distinguish between civilians and military
personell as targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with
your moral equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs
being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of
indiscriminate bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not
at all like terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between
civilian and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
That's just apologism. It's a simple question, really. All I'm
asking is why you excuse behaviour from the US that you condemn
when that self-same behaviour is exhibited by others.
That's just *your* apologism. You excuse the terrorists for using
their indiscriminate tactics, but you want to condemn the US for
being infinitely more discriminating about the difference between
civilians and military.
Hmm. I see that there's only one being civil in this exchange now,
and it ain't you.
Since I have not 'excused' anybody, WTF are you talking about? When
the US uses the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that you condemn
in others, why is it suddenly okay?
Yes, you are trying to excuse somebody, since you're trying to make
believe that the US is "just as bad" as the people we're trying to
stop.
Nope, that's just you reading something that isn't there. Not once
have I made that claim or comparison. Why do you feel the need to say
that I have?
You don't have to make it explicitly. It's implicit in your entire
argument. It's not my fault that you're an apologist for terrorism.
It seems that you REALLY don't want to answer that question.
The US does not use the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that I
condemn in others.
Again, that's just you avoiding the question.
No, that's just you being dull and repetitious.
How many times do I have to answer your question before you
acknowledge that I have answered it?
You have not answered it. Instead you've simply denied that the US has
used indiscriminate tactics that you pretend to abhor in others.
I have answered it. That you don't accept my answer is not my problem.
Why do you keep asking stupid questions if you don't want to be
treated like you're asking stupid questions?
Your ad-hom attacks only emphasize your inability to converse
effectually, you know?
That's not an ad-hom attack, that's an accurate characterization of your
argument.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 04:12:08 PM |
|
|
On 29 Jul 2006 20:09:29 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980FAE13E6152fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:18inc2p0pf41d93aob2m5l1lq6iceg3l3v@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 18:15:58 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980F9AD43B8F8fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ih1nc21tl111bjk0okutjtk3nkcr2008cp@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 14:41:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F766E9BB31fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:5qrmc2dgg8ge8fm6hei3c48e1bajnbcfot@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 11:32:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote in message <Xns980F56792CD18fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:mtflc2dicr3i1k6e79go88coo3uanf4epv@4ax.com:
On 28 Jul 2006 23:10:47 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote
in message <Xns980ECCD252A2Bfstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:05rkc2l9rthmfjqc3l0pq29l9043r2npg2@fe06.highwinds-
media.phx:
On 28 Jul 2006 18:39:18 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
<Xns980E9EC9F4E5Efstone69@66.150.105.47>:
scottrichter422@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote in
news:1hj6k5k.yd5saj6kmjeoN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Terrorism is a strategy, a technique of warfare. It has no
ideology.
Funny how it's always ideologues who adopt terrorism as
their tactic.
No, it's people who don't have a 500 billion dollar military
budget. People who can't afford laser-guided bombs,
up-armored Humvees, or war zone Burger Kings.
I don't have a 500 billion dollar budget either, but I haven't
adopted terrorism. No, Scott, it takes a certain sort of
ideology
to
use terrorism as a tactic in warfare. The sort of ideology
that doesn't distinguish between civilians and military
personell as targets. You know, like you liberals cretins with
your moral equivalences.
Just out of curiousity, when there were unguided cluster bombs
being
dropped on Baghdad, what did that count as?
War.
So, when someone you approve of uses the tactic of
indiscriminate bombing against civilians, it's OK, and thus not
at all like terrorism? How does that work, exactly?
What exactly excuses the US from not discriminating between
civilian and military targets?
Baghdad was a military target.
That's just apologism. It's a simple question, really. All I'm
asking is why you excuse behaviour from the US that you condemn
when that self-same behaviour is exhibited by others.
That's just *your* apologism. You excuse the terrorists for using
their indiscriminate tactics, but you want to condemn the US for
being infinitely more discriminating about the difference between
civilians and military.
Hmm. I see that there's only one being civil in this exchange now,
and it ain't you.
Since I have not 'excused' anybody, WTF are you talking about? When
the US uses the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that you condemn
in others, why is it suddenly okay?
Yes, you are trying to excuse somebody, since you're trying to make
believe that the US is "just as bad" as the people we're trying to
stop.
Nope, that's just you reading something that isn't there. Not once
have I made that claim or comparison. Why do you feel the need to say
that I have?
You don't have to make it explicitly. It's implicit in your entire
argument. It's not my fault that you're an apologist for terrorism.
And it's not my problem that you have to make claims like that to try
to hide your unwillingness to answer simple questions.
You're letting your emotionalism get the better of you.
It seems that you REALLY don't want to answer that question.
The US does not use the same kind of indiscriminate tactics that I
condemn in others.
Again, that's just you avoiding the question.
No, that's just you being dull and repetitious.
Yes, having to ask it over and over is certainly that. Why not just
answer it?
How many times do I have to answer your question before you
acknowledge that I have answered it?
You have not answered it. Instead you've simply denied that the US has
used indiscriminate tactics that you pretend to abhor in others.
I have answered it. That you don't accept my answer is not my problem.
Why do you keep asking stupid questions if you don't want to be
treated like you're asking stupid questions?
Your ad-hom attacks only emphasize your inability to converse
effectually, you know?
That's not an ad-hom attack, that's an accurate characterization of your
argument.
You really do like your logical fallacies, don't you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 05:02:50 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:pljnc2h6990knrs4o6gq85mo5s5ug7la9f@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 20:09:29 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980FAE13E6152fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
No, that's just you being dull and repetitious.
Yes, having to ask it over and over is certainly that. Why not just
answer it?
Yes, it certainly is. Why don't you pay attention?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: 16 year old girl hanged in Iran |
29 Jul 2006 07:28:01 PM |
|
|
On 29 Jul 2006 22:02:50 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980FC14C32E49fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:pljnc2h6990knrs4o6gq85mo5s5ug7la9f@4ax.com:
On 29 Jul 2006 20:09:29 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
in message <Xns980FAE13E6152fstone69@66.150.105.47>:
No, that's just you being dull and repetitious.
Yes, having to ask it over and over is certainly that. Why not just
answer it?
Yes, it certainly is. Why don't you pay attention?
I have been. So far, you haven't answered the actual question.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
