Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richnorth who wrote (24413)	3/13/2004 10:08:58 AM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27748

lil. My last post to you was I thought polite I will not try that again with the likes of you. Backwards and dull witted people are not aware of their condition so I suppose I should just accept that there is an excuse for your rantings. However you said...." Nonsense. Too bad the Al-Qaeda folks don't share your opinion. And so they acted. Mind you, it was the Crusades that invaded Moslem territories. So it was they that started the seemingly never-ending series of tit-for-tats."..... And to justify this foolish statement you say...." If I inherited and have owned a certain property and business for a long time and then changed my name and/or religion and, following that, I adopted a different lifestyle and a different method of doing business, it does not necessarily follow that my property and business has ceased to be mine. From this you should be able to see your logic is flawed and cock-eyed."..... So now you say that a property inherited will always be the property of the first inhabitants yet you say that territories invaded and taken by force by islam religion belongs to islam and is their territory. you said...." For a while, in the past, it was tacitly assumed, "To the victors go the spoils of war." In that scenario, lands were acquired by conquest. But that is no longer true today, however much some folks would like to argue to the contrary.".... In this statement you suggest that islam is not entitled to any territories they took by force yet you blame the crusaders for taking back what was originally theirs. You said...." In this regard, the Saudis are afraid. They know full well they are not the legitimate owners of the land they now occupy. Their ragtag ancestors took the land by force from folks with Shiite connections (if I am not mistaken) and now the Saudis find themselves needing the US to help them stay in power"..... I remind you of what you have just stated....." If I inherited and have owned a certain property and business for a long time and then changed my name and/or religion and, following that, I adopted a different lifestyle and a different method of doing business, it does not necessarily follow that my property and business has ceased to be mine. From this you should be able to see your logic is flawed and cock-eyed."...... Are you suggesting here that because the Saudis who may have changed their religion or changed their lifestyle are no longer entitled to this property? At this point you may want to consider what you said to me....." From this you should be able to see your logic is flawed and cock-eyed."...... You said...." Does US conquest of the Middle East confer ownership to the US? Certainly not, even though folks like you probably think so. Will the Moslems succeed in ousting the occupying forces? As I am not a Moslem, that issue does not have a high priority in my personal agenda. I leave that question to others who love speculating on it."..... For someone who considers this topic NOT a high priority you sure spend a lot of time shooting of your big mouth and indicating to all your confusion and lack of knowledge and clear thinking on this topic. Again I suggest you consider your statement to me...." From this you should be able to see your logic is flawed and cock-eyed."..... And here is something for you to ponder. The state of Israel where it is located today is pretty much located on the same land .....except for the area known as Gaza or ancient Philistine..... where it was located 2000 or so years before islam even existed and was one of the very first recognized states in the history of the world. Considering the statements you have just made do you then agree that Jews are entitled to the land that is considered the state of Israel to day? Or maybe it belongs to the descendents of the Canaanites. Your truly are a confused person and you should stop trying to make your self appear to be intelligent.