We Are All Spaniards

In article , Martin Hotze
writes:

(pacplyer) wrote:

I for one, will support any invasion to discover those facts if
inspectors are not happy.


to reduce it to a personal platform: let's assume that you are doing
something
illegal. Intelligence has no chance to get enough evidence (for the sake of
the
argument). Now: shall police - just because they are not happy of the outcome

and they don't have 100% proof that you are _INNOCENT_ (rings a bell?) have
every right to search your house (without a warrant) and your belongings?
[well,
in the name of terrorism this is already the law in the US]


OK, lets do make it personal.

A known thug, who you know for a fact has killed many people, approaches you on
the street and threatens you. He is holding his hand in his jacket pocket as
though he has a gun in there. He says he has a gun, but you cannot actually see
if he has it or if he is bluffing.

You, on the other hand, do have a gun. What are you going to do? Give him first
shot? Wait to see if he is lying about having the gun? Demand that a third
party, who hates you as much as the thug, be allowed to peek inside the pocket
and tell you if there is a gun?

Or are you going to assume his threat is sincere and take him out first?

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

Martin Hotze wrote:

Newps wrote:


The rest of the world hates us anyway because we have a very high
standard of living here

there are many countries with a higher standard.



No, there's not.

Norway tops UN list over best places to live



The UN list? You've got to be kidding.

Martin Hotze wrote:

Norway tops UN list over best places to live (...)

A UN list showing the U.S. in an unfavorable light? GASP!!

Better check your meds dude; this is the same U.N. that
appointed Lybia as the chair of the human rights commission.

"January 2003, The Libyan candidate, diplomat and former
journalist Najat al-Hajjaji, won 33 votes in a secret
ballot of the 53-country Commission, with 17 states
abstaining and three voting no -- apparently including the
United States."

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:


"Frank" wrote in message ...

Depends.....

If one believes they have a legitimate right to a country then the
answer is obvious.


They were given a country. Why do they need another one and why aren't
the Jewish Palestinians entitled to one?



If one believes otherwise, that is that Israel owns the land free
and clear, then they must be fighting for equal rights as citizens.


Israeli Arab citizens have rights equal with Israeli Jews.



I don't know the answer, but as a simple test answer this question.
Should a Palestinian be voting in an Israeli election or not. If not
then where?


How are you using the term Palestinian here? There is no Palestinian
nationality, there never was. There are two nations that were created on
the former Palestine Mandate, Israel and Jordan. All Israeli citizens,
Arab
and Jew, vote in Israeli elections. What nation, other than the US,
allows non-citizens to vote in it's elections?

Then why do these folks keep calling themselves Palestinians? What was all
that negotiating borders for? Right, wrong or indifferent there are a lot
of people that feel they have a claim to something there. Even Israel
agrees with that in priniciple.

I don't know, but it's my understanding that the people in the camps and in
the disputed areas aren't on either the Jordanian or the Israeli voting
roles. They consider themselves Palestinians and they, apparently, have
various treaties/accords/agreements to support that notion. If I am wrong
and they _were_ able to vote for or against Sharon last election then I
will be suprised that they haven't been able to put up numbers that would
infuence the election.

Israel has agreed to the creation of a Palestinian state, although they
certainly aren't happy about it. Understandable in that no one want's to
give up land. But they are in the driver's seat when it comes to the peace
process and dragging this out just causes too much pain and suffering on
both sides.

The Israelis aren't going anywhere and neither are the Palestinians. The
sooner Israel gives up trying to avoid actually handing over the promised
territory the better.
--
Frank....H

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:6BM7c.61319$_w.945434@attbi_s53...
Please pack this drivel away, once and for all...

No problem, there's obviously no point in arguing with you. One last
thing I would like to say, though. In this discussion you have shown
how far from being a Spaniard you are, inspite of your own subject
line.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
.net...
It wasn't stolen, they abandoned it. The Jews forced no Arabs off their
land.

http://www.palestine-un.org/info/ref.html

Paul

"Newps" wrote in message
news:zwZ7c.74677$_w.1027638@attbi_s53...


Martin Hotze wrote:

Newps wrote:


The rest of the world hates us anyway because we have a very high
standard of living here

there are many countries with a higher standard.



No, there's not.

Norway tops UN list over best places to live



The UN list? You've got to be kidding.

Notice the criteria the UN uses in their list.

"Frank" wrote in message ...
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:


"Frank" wrote in message ...
How are you using the term Palestinian here? There is no Palestinian
nationality, there never was. There are two nations that were created
on
the former Palestine Mandate, Israel and Jordan. All Israeli citizens,
Arab
and Jew, vote in Israeli elections. What nation, other than the US,
allows non-citizens to vote in it's elections?

Then why do these folks keep calling themselves Palestinians? What was all
that negotiating borders for? Right, wrong or indifferent there are a lot
of people that feel they have a claim to something there. Even Israel
agrees with that in priniciple.


Calling themselves Palestinians is like someone from Georgia calling
themself a "Southerner".

Tom Sixkiller wrote:


The UN list? You've got to be kidding.


Notice the criteria the UN uses in their list.


I didn't bother to read it. Nothing the UN says could possibly matter.

Martin Hotze wrote:

Better check your meds dude;

well, I can afford medicamentation (can you?)

Easily. A sufficiently peaceful upbringing and a good education (all
Federally subsidized, by the way, and not lightly), positioned me to
take work that offers health insurance.

Now, I buy my own health "insurance," at a premium rate fully
one-forth of that which my boss would be charged. So he pays me the
premium money as salary, grossed-up for taxes, and I keep the
difference to take care of deductibles and copays.

It helps marvelously that I don't abuse any substance except processed
carbohydrates.

Now, what about the unfortunate in the country?

Well, for "uninsured children", there is *always* medicaid and WIC.
For the "uninsured seniors", there is Medicare. All three are Federal
programs. Those in the middle can quit smoking and buy the individual
stuff, in most States. The rest have decent ARISTA coverage through
their companies.

Just because your system has one solution, doesn't mean the U.S.
solution is so wanting that it needs to be razed and replaced. Fewer
people suffer (materially) in the U.S. than anywhere else in the
world.

Rob