Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Espnthree]

My feeling is the House got it right. Actual support for a terrorist organization that  kills babies and rapes mothers should be unacceptable to Christians and Jews.

What do you think constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

There was only one person subject to censure.
Rashida Tailib?

Jumping in to answer a question and not answering it is a little rude, don't you think? As is not bothering to correctly spell a name.

But since you jumped in, what do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

Read the Censure motion.

The resolution censures Tlaib, D-Mich., for promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.

Which does not answer this question: What do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically. If you prefer, what, specifically was the false 10/7 narrative she promoted, and how, specifically did she call for the destruction of the State of Israel?

Not that I expect you to ever answer the actual question. Or for that matter any question.

The Censure motion was specific to that question, an answered to the satisfaction of 234 House Members after debate.
What is your point?

That you
 cannot and will not answer the question.

The question was answered by the House members.
It was directed to them, specifically.
If you disagree with them call your Congress person.

[facilitatorn]

Red does not understand the question. Red loves being hoodwinked. It makes him feel smug

[Oiled]

Before leaving this off topic topic I wanted to note that there is a sentence in TMWCH I laughed at harder than anything else I have ever read: "And at this point he remembered he couldn't swim."

In context, of course.

Yes that was funny.  Richards is trying to recall what great service he might have done the late Mr Goodson.  He fantasizes that he saved the man from drowning but...

[luee]

Please stop playing the race card already. Brown people the world over!

My feeling is the House got it right. Actual support for a terrorist organization that  kills babies and rapes mothers should be unacceptable to Christians and Jews.Gaza

Bibi who sought the presidency in order to stay out of prison for corruption and formed a coalition of Kahanists who think like luee was so busy try to remove the societal guardrails just like Trumps wants here, was so busy demoralizing the population he let Hamas plot and then wreak BARBARISM on Israel on the scale of Attila the Hun.

If you had relatives in Gaza who have now suffered casualties in an order of magnitude at least  five times 10/7 you would be bitching about Israel, too. Also, to make someone toe the line in support of those blowing your people to bits is indicative of the hate you have for the hordes of primitive brown people the world over.

Israeli destruction of the terrorist group hamas has nothing to do with the censure. I love me the brown and black people of the world. I just do not like terrorists or supporters of terrorists. I am also against suicide and murder and religious brands that actually make rape and pillage their number one selling point. If you are a primitive you do not attack a modern democracy. Should be on the first page of your holy book.

[bambu.]

So, if 25% of 'Palestinians' in Gaza support Hamas, as the respected journalist says, then 500,000 Palestinians in Gaza support Hamas.

That's not good, no wonder much of the place has now turned into rubble.
Terrorists within have a bad habit of doing that to places in which they live. Lebanon is another perfect example.

[bambu.]

Ah yes, 'Palestine';

Palestine is the birthplace of Judaism and Christianity, and has been controlled by many kingdoms and powers, including Ancient Egypt, Ancient Israel and Judah, the Persian Empire, Alexander the Great and his successors, the Hasmoneans, the Roman Empire, several Muslim caliphates, and the crusaders.

[bambu.]

Archaeologic and genetic data support that both Jews and Palestinians came from the ancient Canaanites, who extensively mixed with Egyptians, Mesopotamian, and Anatolian peoples in ancient times.

[bambu.]

"Land only belongs to you...if you can defend it"  - bambu

[bambu.]

One DNA study by Nebel found substantial genetic overlap among Israeli/Palestinian Arabs and Jews. Nebel proposed that part, or perhaps the majority" of Muslim Palestinians descend from "local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD".

#####

Well there you go.

It gets even more interesting when you go into the 'Philistines'.

[Hairy Lime]

My feeling is the House got it right. Actual support for a terrorist organization that  kills babies and rapes mothers should be unacceptable to Christians and Jews.

What do you think constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

There was only one person subject to censure.
Rashida Tailib?

Jumping in to answer a question and not answering it is a little rude, don't you think? As is not bothering to correctly spell a name.

But since you jumped in, what do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

Read the Censure motion.

The resolution censures Tlaib, D-Mich., for promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.

Which does not answer this question: What do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically. If you prefer, what, specifically was the false 10/7 narrative she promoted, and how, specifically did she call for the destruction of the State of Israel?

Not that I expect you to ever answer the actual question. Or for that matter any question.

The Censure motion was specific to that question, an answered to the satisfaction of 234 House Members after debate.
What is your point?

That you
 cannot and will not answer the question.

The question was answered by the House members.
It was directed to them, specifically.

No, it was directed to luee and later you. You choose not to respond because you know there is nothing you can legitimately defend as "actual support for a terrorist organization." Luee.does not answer because he is incapable of it.

[Hairy Lime]

"Land only belongs to you...if you can defend it"  - bambu

Then it belongs to the Palestinians if they can take it. What is your objection to Hamas again?

[Espnthree]

My feeling is the House got it right. Actual support for a terrorist organization that  kills babies and rapes mothers should be unacceptable to Christians and Jews.

What do you think constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

There was only one person subject to censure.
Rashida Tailib?

Jumping in to answer a question and not answering it is a little rude, don't you think? As is not bothering to correctly spell a name.

But since you jumped in, what do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

Read the Censure motion.

The resolution censures Tlaib, D-Mich., for promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.

Which does not answer this question: What do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically. If you prefer, what, specifically was the false 10/7 narrative she promoted, and how, specifically did she call for the destruction of the State of Israel?

Not that I expect you to ever answer the actual question. Or for that matter any question.

The Censure motion was specific to that question, an answered to the satisfaction of 234 House Members after debate.
What is your point?

That you
 cannot and will not answer the question.

The question was answered by the House members.
It was directed to them, specifically.

No, it was directed to luee and later you. You choose not to respond because you know there is nothing you can legitimately defend as "actual support for a terrorist organization." Luee.does not answer because he is incapable of it.

And you are incapable of an honest debate. 
Tailib support of Hamas( terrorists) came in a video she posted FromThe River To The Seawhich was used in the House debate on Censuring her.
Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar of California said leadership had encouraged rank and file Democrats to vote to table the censure resolution against Tlaib. The House rejected that motion in a 208-213 vote. Aguilar condemned  Tlaib and said the phrase is used by Hamas to advocate destruction of Israel, a phrase he considers offensive.

Censure was passed on a bi partisan basis.

[bambu.]

"Land only belongs to you...if you can defend it"  - bambu

Then it belongs to the Palestinians if they can take it. What is your objection to Hamas again?

And it will belong to Israel if it can take it...in today's world, look at Russia.
Hamas? Loved by many Palestinians.

Israel has a right to exist.
There could've been two states, Israel and Palestine, but the Palestinians didn't want that.

Anyone supporting Hamas should also be supporting Israel's reply.

Iran hates me.
Hamas hates me.
So I feel entitled to hate them, that is only fair.

[bambu.]

Happy birthday King Charles!
75.

Long live the King.

He made former Prime Minister David Cameron, Lord Cameron, which means he can sit in parliament without being elected.
Current Prime Minister Sunak has made "explosive cabinet changes", one being appointing Lord Cameron Foreign Secretary.
bambu is pleased.

[luee]

My feeling is the House got it right. Actual support for a terrorist organization that  kills babies and rapes mothers should be unacceptable to Christians and Jews.

What do you think constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

There was only one person subject to censure.
Rashida Tailib?

Jumping in to answer a question and not answering it is a little rude, don't you think? As is not bothering to correctly spell a name.

But since you jumped in, what do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically.

Read the Censure motion.

The resolution censures Tlaib, D-Mich., for promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.

Which does not answer this question: What do you think Tlaib said that constituted that "actual suppprt for a terrorist organization"? Specifically. If you prefer, what, specifically was the false 10/7 narrative she promoted, and how, specifically did she call for the destruction of the State of Israel?

Not that I expect you to ever answer the actual question. Or for that matter any question.

The Censure motion was specific to that question, an answered to the satisfaction of 234 House Members after debate.
What is your point?

That you
 cannot and will not answer the question.

The question was answered by the House members.
It was directed to them, specifically.

No, it was directed to luee and later you. You choose not to respond because you know there is nothing you can legitimately defend as "actual support for a terrorist organization." Luee.does not answer because he is incapable of it.

Everyone but you seems to understand what a censure vote means.

The House voted 234-188 to censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., over her remarks related to Israel and Palestinians. Twenty-two Democrats joined Republicans in voting to formally rebuke Tlaib for her comments.

The measure, sponsored by Georgia Republican Rich McCormick, accuses Tlaib of "promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel."