Print

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

[LarryB!]

Speaking of barbarism

http://calendar.eji.org/racial-injustice/may/19

[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.

[LarryB!]

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.

[Espnthree]

Interesting to remember 20 per cent of Israel population is Arab.
All with equal citizenship rights as the Jews.

From Land ro Seawoulld wpie them out,too.
Barbaric!

[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.

[facilitatorn]

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.

A terrorist organization that kills babies and rapes mothers is the most complete and concise definition of the republican party that I have yet heard. It is unacceptable for Christians and Jews to support the GOP.

[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 Tailibe.

55% of the House agreed she deserved it, nearly a landslide.

[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 Tailibe.

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.

[Hairy Lime]

Well, my list would triple if I were doing all masters of the short form.  Vlad the Enthraller, yes.  Flannery O'Connor (and not just because she strongly looked like me mum).  Kafka, Chekhov, Cheever, Borges, Dick, Barthelme, Malamud, Bradbury, many others. 

OK, added Signs and Symbols to my priority reading list.  Will report back in some topic appropriate forum.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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.

[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