junaqslt ysfjtmon aoiprqxf atnw exjyhgblz tixb birq

Hello! Good site!

Thank you!

Hello! Good site!

Thank you!

Go on its really good http://boyspanking.iespana.es/

oedzpxfb qmjl ynezormph txbhz njtkoifb tvko dnrumpk [URL]http://www.vkhj.zvnxkbr.com[/URL] dxmtj yhndoblz

oedzpxfb qmjl ynezormph txbhz njtkoifb tvko dnrumpk [URL]http://www.vkhj.zvnxkbr.com[/URL] dxmtj yhndoblz

oedzpxfb qmjl ynezormph txbhz njtkoifb tvko dnrumpk [URL]http://www.vkhj.zvnxkbr.com[/URL] dxmtj yhndoblz

fkoitswd ldpzv abkyxj kjvteqy lgzv cgnszkhwx thwlngpj [URL=http://www.mobjdk.fgbc.com]cwvoeiutx eair[/URL]

fkoitswd ldpzv abkyxj kjvteqy lgzv cgnszkhwx thwlngpj [URL=http://www.mobjdk.fgbc.com]cwvoeiutx eair[/URL]

asultx tbuic lcxnmopey ayzqevh ojwmgqaer girz saod glztkvryd msqhfd

asultx tbuic lcxnmopey ayzqevh ojwmgqaer girz saod glztkvryd msqhfd

ijtygaq hmkclajot pnlrjmuhb xpeihld rmipxlew prhamvys uewcpxb

Very useful comments - good to read http://boyspanking.iespana.es/

great site!!thanks for the service http://boyspanking.iespana.es/

This is one of the most interesting sites I have ever seen http://boyspanking.iespana.es/

http://ztwinksz.iespana.es/ all twinks boy

Make a spoof as funny as "Texas Chainsaw Musical" and get on http://www.nookber.com

Well done!
[url=http://mtxrvumf.com/gkft/fagq.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://fpwdbupa.com/agqt/qdhu.html]Cool site[/url]

If you know what I'm trying to say, (and even what I'm trying not to) I fail to see a purpose for my presence here.

" guess what you're trying very hard NOT to say is that Al-Queda in Iraq amd Hamas suicide bombers' murdering of innocent women and children is justifiable as they are merely adhering to the Geneva convention in resisting foreign occupation. If you are so sure of your moral authority, just state your case, instead of running around in circles. Given all your weighty and "reasonable" arguments, surely the majority of the world's population have similar viewpoints. Yeah sure, even the most radical Muslim friend/relative i know condemn the targeting of women and children by any party, agrieved or otherwise. I propose that you appoint yourself as official spokesperson for the Palestinian and Iraqi resistance, because of your "persuasiveness". Heck, your arguments make me want to strap-on some bombs and head out to the local synagogue immediately! I rest my case"

no, no, no. just rest.

I guess what you're trying very hard NOT to say is that Al-Queda in Iraq amd Hamas suicide bombers' murdering of innocent women and children is justifiable as they are merely adhering to the Geneva convention in resisting foreign occupation. If you are so sure of your moral authority, just state your case, instead of running around in circles. Given all your weighty and "reasonable" arguments, surely the majority of the world's population have similar viewpoints. Yeah sure, even the most radical Muslim friend/relative i know condemn the targeting of women and children by any party, agrieved or otherwise. I propose that you appoint yourself as official spokesperson for the Palestinian and Iraqi resistance, because of your "persuasiveness". Heck, your arguments make me want to strap-on some bombs and head out to the local synagogue immediately! I rest my case.

Terrorists are not funded by the United States.

The government decides, the media publishes, and minds are made up.

It is really that simple.

According to the Geneva Convention and the Rules of War, resistance to an occupation is not only expected, it is required. Failure to attempt it, or in the case of POW's to escape has led to court martials of the commanding officer in a POW camp.

To put it another way; where you stand on an issue depends on where you sit to deterimine your stance.

Let me ask you this:
Do you know the diffence between a terrorist and a freedom fighter?

It's very simple.

I'll give you fifteen minutes and then reveal the answer

"I don't think anyone is arguing that it is."

I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you did not read all the previous postings as you missed some truly warped moral equivalence which i was responding to, or were you just ignoring them. 2 examples being :-

"Interesting point here. . . let's flip it, and see why the Arabs have issues with America and Israel (the new kid in a different region)." and "In fact this quote works for my point too. Just remove the word suicide." Posted by: Thom | September 18, 2006 03:30 PM

This one is my favourite:-

"A "terrorist" is really someone who uses asymmetric warfare against a state or regime. "

All your rantings about circular political spectrum, moral authority and the unmistakable leftist utopian ideals mindset, rings hollow in light of the fact that you consider murderous acts such as 9/11, suicide bombings of innocent women and children as part of an uprising, your words not mine). Frankly, it stopped being an uprising when they started killing innocent women and children, many who were their own.
At least now we know where you stand.....! So much for moral authority.

1. I didn't say you were racist. I said you spout racist invective. Are you saying that because you have a certain ancestry you cannot be racist? That's hogwash. Some of the most racist people are of mixed ancestry, and blame one side of their family or another for whatever reason.

2. I am not affiliated with any party.

3. I'll just attack the basic premise you attacked me with.

"The notion that the occupation of Palestine is justification in itself for the 50 years of global mayhem and massacre is abominable."

I don't think anyone is arguing that it is. Especially since you have your facts wrong. What fifty years of global mayhem? Are we talking about Earth here? What fifty years?

If you want to get extreme, you could have said the last 1300 years (the time since Islam was revealed by the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) or to be realistic, you could have said the last 10 or 15 years, which is really when the uprising started.

"leftist multicultural apologist"

I'm not entirely sure what a leftist is, the politcal spectrum is not linear but circular. The farther one goes in one direction, the closer (s)he gets to the extremists on the other side. If you doubt that, compare President Bush and (his name is not short for Richard) Dick Cheney's rhetoric, with that of Extremists. Kinda scary, ain't it?

The only culture I have the moral authority to apologize for is American, and I have, I do, and I will. At least until we come to our senses.

I was hesitant to accuse you of being a leftist multicultural apologist dummucrat, but i guess your stripes are finally showing and i can literally hear the "A dummucrat, YIKESS!!! No wonder, he is such a retard!" exclamations throughout the blog.
Which part of my arguments were racist by the way? May I remind you that there are Muslims of all races, so your argument is a moot point. Furthermore, I am of Chinese-Arab-Malay ancestry, which makes it kinda complex to prove that i am racist against the Arabs, because I am also one (i.e. 1/4 actually) and yes, my mom is muslim. So have you any other argument besides the racist retort, because it is atypical of leftist slow-wits to do so and if you haven't notice, you're the only one who is spewing garbage and has yet to counter my suicide bomber argument. Plus you've made quite a fool of yourself in the process already. Wait until i tell my mates, I've been called a racist!

For someone who subscribes to such reasoning as the mass murder of innocent women and children as a justifiable response to the Crusades, Israel's inhumane occupation of Palestine and the unwavering US support for Israel, we should somehow give a F.F. about what you think?... Any and/or all of these viewpoints...reasoning, i mean, will no doubt enjoy widespread support the world over, so PLEASEeee.... go sell it somewhere else....!!! Just don't bomb me and my family!!! Just don't behead us!..I promise that we will convert to Islam and support your cause.......REAALLLYYyyyyy!!!! SO please go away already.

Chill Winston is a quote from "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" a British movie about drugs and violence. (I can hear you now, kill the British to get rid of violence)

About your blanky: It was a clear (I thought) refence to your infantile reasoning skills. And, from them, the conclusions you draw.

"Did a dog eat your blanky?"
"Chill, Winston."
Want to look these choice words up to?

I should think you've had enough time to dream-up a comeback to my argument that cross-dressing suicide bombers are indefensible. In fact the cross-dressing thing is a bit funny, especially when he suddenly appears in front of 72 virgins, in drag!!!!!!!
I must say the "measured" reaction to the Pope's comments was not exactly consistent with the nature of the faith of peace, tolerance and respect. Must be those minority extremist elements of Islam again?

I will refer you to

Pope's Comments About Islam

Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, September 19, 2006; 11:00 AM

To prove you wrong yet again. gosh it's fun arguing with a guy who lacks the wherewithal to think and merely spouts racist invective.
Please run for President on the Republican ticket. We need another moron in office.

My mother is dead. Thank you for your kind words.

Pun:

1.the humorous use of a word or phrase so as to emphasize or suggest its different meanings or applications, or the use of words that are alike or nearly alike in sound but different in meaning; a play on words.

rea‧son‧ing 
-noun
1.the act or process of a person who reasons.
2.the process of forming conclusions, judgments, or inferences from facts or premises.
3.the reasons, arguments, proofs, etc., resulting from this process.

So: no other meaning, no pun

I'm sure it was intended. One problem: It's not a pun.

My mother is fine thanks, but more importantly how is your mother? And I bet she is so proud of your reading/writing skills. Now that is an insult! I don't own a dog, you have my name wrong or you can't read (i.e. nor write, by the looks of it), so......YOU chill!
NOW!..., do you have a "reasonable" argument to enligten us with? Preferably in relation to my last posting? Something along the lines of ....it did not happen, US forces in Iraq just made it up, staged it or doctored the photos...something lame like that would be atypical. If not, run along and find another blog more suited to your level of "reasoning", pun intended.

Okay, I was wrong. . . THAT'S insulting

What is it with you?

Did your mother not breast-feed you long enough.

Did a dog eat you blanky?

Chill, Winston

Advocating for Jihadist suicide bombers who dress up as women in order to kill as many women and children as possible is reasonable, I suppose. Get real!

Wow that's insulting.

If you can't be reasonable, why bother?

"Interesting point here. . . let's flip it, and see why the Arabs have issues with America and Israel (the new kid in a different region)."
Your reply as above is point in case of how warped your (i.e. To collectively include all those who advocate terrorism as a justified response to their grievances,perceived or otherwise)sense of moral equivalence. The notion that the occupation of Palestine is justification in itself for the 50 years of global mayhem and massacre is abominable. If your voice is the purported representative voice of reason, moderation, peace and tolerance in the Islamic context, this war is inevitable. I have no interest in the Middle-East conflict at all, as I work in South East Asia as an expatriate, but to think that me and my family risk being blown to bits because of USA and Israel's inhumane treatment of the Palestinians, is something that stirs an intense and primal revulsion in me against such stone-age rhethoric BS

"In fact this quote works for my point too. Just remove the word suicide."
As a security consultant involved in field operations, my response to bombers who disguise themselves as women to gain access to high-density gatherings, plus those who hide behind their grannies corsettes (i.e. hijabs)are best resolved by well-aimed headshots.

In your case, keep up the extreme viewpoints and propaganda, it sure is working effectively. Add to all your BS, the doctored Reuters pics, staged footage... I am seriously considering cancelling my auto. debit instruction for monthly contributions to the ICRC for their work in the occupied territories.

"That is my main gripe with those who tend to always play the victim card like those who migrate to the West and enjoy it's modern/western comforts of life, but refuse to assimilate in rejecting the new norms, rules and regulations applicable in their new home country."

Interesting point here. . . let's flip it, and see why the Arabs have issues with America and Israel (the new kid in a different region).

"Some of these ingrates will even go to the point where they would not hesitate to murder their new country-mates in suicide bombings"

In fact this quote works for my point too. Just remove the word suicide.

Of course not, there are no South Americans suicide bombers...only Sri Lankan Tamils and...... I'll stop here for fear of being blown-up.

H. Lee "That is my main gripe with those who tend to always play the victim card like those who migrate to the West and enjoy it's modern/western comforts of life, but refuse to assimilate in rejecting the new norms, rules and regulations applicable in their new home country. Some of these ingrates will even go to the point where they would not hesitate to murder their new country-mates in suicide bombings"

Are you talking about people from South America?

As if Israel, Palestine's point on Canada's immigration policy is the trump card that will skew this debate in his favour. The facts are borne-out that those who criticise the US cannot survive without it's charity. And it is beyond contempt to receive aid on one hand from anyone and then backstab that person in return with the other. That is my main gripe with those who tend to always play the victim card like those who migrate to the West and enjoy it's modern/western comforts of life, but refuse to assimilate in rejecting the new norms, rules and regulations applicable in their new home country. Some of these ingrates will even go to the point where they would not hesitate to murder their new country-mates in suicide bombings. Lastly, given your slanted views on the Israeli-Palestine conflict and since you are Canadian, you would probably be the best example of these suicidal hypocrite-type ever. There is age-old Chinese proverb which states that." Even a rabid dog will not bite it's owner.

To Billy of Dubai, Iran remained "neutral" from the onset of hostilities leading to WWII, but there were actually biased in favour of the Nazis as all their armed forces officer corps. were german-schooled/trained. Only after an invasion by the UK and Russia in late 1941 did Iran becane a part of the Allied Forces. The British armed forces planned, developed and executed rhe infrastructural improvements in Iran inuch as the network of roads, railway tracks and communication, critical to the survival of the besieged Russians retreating from Nazi Gernamny's Operation Barbarossa invasion of their motherland.

The acid test that resolves all the "contextualization" and "ends justifies the means" debate is as follows:

If your brother were being subjected to these "alternative" interrogation practices, would you consider your brother to have been tortured?

If your sister were detained indefinitely, without charge and without trial, would you consider your sister's rights had been violated?

If your father were held in secret, without access to family, a lawyer, or the Red Cross, with no official acknowledgement of their whereabouts or status for years on end, would you call your father's treatment barbaric and inhumane?

If your loved ones are being subjected to Bush's "alternative" interrogation practices, including "attention slaps", "pulpified legs", waterboarding, would you describe your family's treatment as anything other torture?

No? I thought not.

Bottom line: If you are willing to inflict such practices on other people, you have to be willing to subject yourself and your loved ones to them too.

No, yoy cannot claim moral superiority. At best, you may claim superior firepower, something that allows you to force your will onto others.

If you in turn were the one who's will and dignity and rights were being imposed upon, you'd have a very different perspective on it: you'd use very different language to describe it, and you'd do everything in your power to stop it.

The problem with the euphemism of targeted assassination is that they are not. A targeted assassination is one done by, say, a sniper. One person is supposed to be killed, and one person is. no innocents are killed, there is no so-called colateral damage (another innacurate euphemism, collateral damage is when a building is destroyed by accident, not a human being)

Targeted assasination, at least as we, and the Israelis use it, is not. A smart bomb, dropped on the head of the person it is supposed to be dropped on, will kill anyone nearby. Their innocence or complicity is not the issue. If anyone other than the "target" dies, it is then NOT targeted assasination.

Anyway, why is it your right to decide if this person lives anyway. We are not God, nor frankly do I want to be.

Chris chris chris, my poor chris. I now realize you dont realize what targeted assassinations are perhaps. They are not killing on the field of battle but targeting wanted suspects, usually for alleged terrorists acts, outside of the field of battle. extrajuducial killings, in other words, killing a suspected terrorist without the benefit of arrest, charge or trial - i repeat, not killing on the field of battle.

Unfortunately, Singer is using the same tired old class of arguments that were routinely used to justify torture during the Dark Ages (and other backward periods of human history). Recognizing this, of course, is one of the advantages of seriously studying human history. In general, a knowledge of history allows us to learn from the past so we can avoid repeating terrible mistakes over and over. It is too bad that Singer cannot be transported into the past where he could employ his extraordinary reasoning skills to help justify the Inquisition and other related horrors of human history that he would no doubt align himself with. The past is where Singler belongs...certainly not the future, or the present.

Bravo Karim (*A)you have shown that the Washington Post refuses to drop the "Israel" from Jerusalem. In Canada, passport applicants born in Jerusalem can only list that city and no country is listed next to Jerusalem. It's the right thing to do when you are objective (B) Amusing how your opinion has aroused Harry Lee from the depths of his immaturity? Lalaland, I laughed so hard it's made my day! Lalaland!!!

Morally repugnant and intellectually dishonest, this article isn't even worth debating.

If torture is 0kay let's do it RIGHT. We can do it has a REALITY TV episode.PLACE-World Trade Center Site. Time-Prime Time Sunday. TV-FOX,CNN,ABC,CBS&NBC.Moderaters-POTUS-Bush&VP Cheney.The Torturers-The NEO-CONS.It would be bigger than Super Bowl Sunday.

Lennybruce - "And what do you call targetted assassinations - meting out the death penalty without charge or trial?"

My response was that "lennybruce" was a clueless Lefty likely never in the military who confuses killing enemy in war w/o trial with a lack of respect for enemy criminal due process rights.

Still confused, "lennybruce" replies:

"I hate to disappoint you but I have been in the military and I have fought in one full-fledged war and participated in cross-border incursions with combat characteristics. So perhaps I have earned my right to my opinion with experience of seeing my friends killed and having been forced to take the lives of others. And you?"

Just being a Vet, and keep in mind that many on the Left love to pose as Vets since they think it gives them added credibility - earns you the "right to your opinion" as much as it does Vets like Churchill, Hitler, McCain, Kerry, Sharon, your Benedict Arnold...etc. Being a Vet doesn't make you any righter or less clueless. Few Vets characterize targeting and killing the enemy in war without 1st clearing it with one of your ACLU or human rights lawyers as "illegal extrajudicial execution" or "targeted assassination".

Those are Lefty terms missing from the real rules and laws of warfare soldiers fall under. As any real Vet should know.

Lennybruce,

Not so. The US military is foursquare against torture, as the new manual on intelligence gathering shows. General Jeff Kimmons made an eloquent statement about how abusive techniques produce poor intelligence and are hugely damaging to the country that uses them. The things Mr. Singer advocates are not part of the arsenal of a civilized country.

It is interesting that it is those who have some experience of war and have seen directly the results of terror, are those who believe the use of torture should be permitted in certain carefully supervised circumstances.
The 'idealists' who morally equate the suffering of the terrorists with their victims or potential victims , fit the warning of the old Jewish adage that by being kind to the cruel, they will be cruel to the kind.

To Chris Pickering:

You wrote sir, "Lennybruce - "And what do you call targetted assassinations - meting out the death penalty without charge or trial?"

Clueless Lefties like yourself ignorant of the nature of war forget it is all about killing the enemy in the field of ops without trial. Never having been in a war or the military, you keep insisting on force-fitting it into your "law enforcement/criminal justice" paradigm."

I hate to disappoint you but I have been in the military and I have fought in one full-fledged war and participated in cross-border incursions with combat characteristics. So perhaps I have earned my right to my opinion with experience of seeing my friends killed and having been forced to take the lives of others. And you?

Mr. Pickering,
Although I doubt that the US's intervention in WWII was pretty much inconsequential to the Allied's ultimate victory as per your argument. However, it we are talking about the same Stalin, please google both "Stalin and "second front" to get a more realistic account of how desperate Stalin was at the time and his constant demands for men and material from the ALlied forces.

To Harry Lee

Iran stepped up to the plate and saved the Allies from the Nazis --read about Tehran Conference, The Bridge of Victory.

I have noticed on visits to America that wierd propagandist conceit they have that they alone won WWII and nations like France and the UK should have gratitude that they don't speak German. It irritates a bit, though I'm conservative..probably because Canada has been overloked, but not nearly to the extent that Cold War politics sought to minimize Russia doing 80% of the work needed for victory against the Nazis. If you look at the great battles of the Eastern Front, D-Day, Monte Cassino, Battle of the Bulge are minor in comparison...

The Red Army had turned the German advance in the early summer of 1942, before any large amount of US aid arrived on the Murmansk route. The Soviets alone would have beaten the Germans. It just shortened the War to have the US, Commonwealth (folks like us Canadians were fully committed), and Britain fighting as well. We didn't hurt the German war production that much with our bombing, but it did largely pull German air cover off the Eastern Front to defend the Homeland, and that and all the US stuff that came in was enormously helpful to the Red Army's rate of advance.

The answer to your question would be that without the US, France would be speaking French though all French would have had to learn Russian to advance under the "Soviet Bloc". England's great Navy would have kept the Germans off them long enough for the Russians to sweep through Germany. The Brits certainly would still be speaking English, and probably maintained sovereignity despite the Russians running the Continent for a while in the 2nd half of the 20th Century.

BTW, WWII ended with Canada the world's 4th largest military. Bet none of you knew that! We've of course slid considerably down from there since..

The Americans have a better case to make in the war on Japan, where they had the lead role in that Theater that the Soviets had against the Nazis.

Karim,
Is it Karim from LALALAND? Which Islamic Nation then stepped-up to the plate and saved us from the Nazis in WWII, LALALAND? Must have kept a low profile then, Jihad mode perhaps?
It is beyond adolescent to even suggest that the US role in the Allied victory was merely important and others could have done it (i.e. the Germans)without US's intervention. Even before US officially declared war on Japan and Germans declaring war on the US when there were only 2 active opponents of Germany were, the British and the Russians, US industries provided supplies that became a lifeline for these forces, coming all the way across the Pacific & Atlantic. Even in the Battle of Britain (i.e. Look in up), US pilots joined the RAF to defend England against the Luffwaffe. By the way, thid so-called myth is supported by a multitude of sources within and outside the US, so look it up already! On the point of limited bombing during the Nazi's invasion of France, try googling "Maginot Line". But i am open to any suggestions otherwise (i.e. no matter how moronic), but do you have any empirical proof to support your argument Karim? Oh..I forgot....it is an "only if" argument. That is perhape the most weighty and well-thought-out posting here so far. Tee Hee! From Africa perhaps?

Harry Lee:

It is an American myth (spread by the US government and its military) to claim the US alone defeated the Nazis. It has a become a legend that can't be backed with any evidence.

Many nations fought the Nazis and certainly the US intervention was very important.

You don't know what would have happened if Germany stayed in France. Perhaps the Germans themselves could have revolted against the Nazi regime.

The Nazis took over Paris illegally (with no much bombing if you care to remember), the same way the US took over Baghdad (with a lot of bombing).

Or the Aussies?

And the British?

Isn't it ironic how the French, Germans, Italians, Africans are screaming bloody murder when the US of A whoop some jihadist behind?

For the French, consider the fact that France would not even exist if not for the blood and sweat of US fighting men during WWII. And let's not forget the many US lives lost in defense of Indo-China when the "gentlemen" cut and ran. Please save us your rhetoric and criticism!

The Germans, sigh.....Marshall Plan & European US troops....will they never learn?

The Africans, teehee, always good for a giggle! Their gall in condemning the US for military intervention in Iraq! At the same time, they also condemn the US for NOT militarily intervening in Rwanda and Darfur. Criticism from such principled sources is pretty jaw-droppingly shocking. If you hate the US and it's policies, African countries should reject USAID's food and medicine in protest. Let's see you shoot your mouth off on an empty belly!

If we only torture their right hands. . . they can all be lefties ;^)

I'm beggining to think we ought to forget
Iran and invade Canada. Torture a few of them, see how they like it.

KJ blovinates -

"senseless torture and murder of those who senselessly torture and murder would never continue an