OK doc, is that the best swipe at me you could give? You're off topic and are hijacking your thread. Continue on with your swipes or continue on with your main forum topic. The choice is in your ballpark. Neeeeexxxxt!!
Attacking me Gary...oh my! You really got some kind of personal problem why you feel a need to keep going at me even when I agreed with you that it is your thread. You must enjoy playing computer doctor and diagnosing an argument which is not there and telling someone to take their meds. I don't know what your problem is but OK, to try to show you that I am really not arguing with you, I will even let you take another jab at me if it makes you feel much better Gary.
But be it known that I have no plans to go away and cower down. I will just stay and watch the fireworks as you tussle and tangle with other members here and continue to stick your foot in your mouth.
I have figured out your Modus Operandi by now so my feelings are not hurt by any inflammatory comments you may direct towards me personally.
Gary, you just don't get it. There IS NO ARGUMENT. I am not denying the main topic is yours whatsoever as it rightfully is. Just that you go off track and hijack it by interjecting statements and questions that are out of line with the topic. It has even been pointed out by other members to you. I believe you are misinterpreting their comments to you as perhaps your grasp of the english language is not always clear in some instances.
Stop arguing with me when there is nothing here to argue about. Go back to your topic already. You act like a little kid saying, "It's mine!!"
We need alot more Sheriff Joe's in this country. He is definitely the man we need in Arizona. Gosh, I wonder if when he retires he decides to study to become a judge or runs for governor?
The country will be glued to his court TV show. Let's call it, "Arizona Sheriff Judge Joe" and let him administer justice in his way. Bring into his court those aspiring to go to prison. Sure to be a big big hit in this country and internationally. You tube
Yes Tom, perhaps we do think alike on topics. I'm rather blunt and controversial sometimes and some members don't quite like that. I will not cower down in the face of adversity even when someone cusses me out.
In person, I am a spitfire hot bed of nails if someone even uses a curse word at me. They get outta my way quick for sure.
Wrong Gary!! It is not only me who stated that. You deny the facts from people who are very familiar with the topic and are close to the situation. Even from some people who lived through the era.
But continue on with your topic lest you get yourself off track again. Taking swipes at me will just have you putting your foot deeper into your mouth. Continue on sir....you are entertaining us all
I wonder if every country the 911 bombers came from would allow the U.S. to build a house of prayer from every religion whose followers perished in the 911 attack? I mean like build synagogues and different faith churches in the Muslim countries and fly the American flag and an international flag of deceased victims of different ethnic cultures at the individual houses of prayer as a peace gesture.
And to those who may have been atheist who perished, at least add some type of a special peaceful reflective thinking area that people may sit and ponder in their thoughts. Maybe a memory garden with special lighting possibly. I think that this would be more appropriate as a reminder to the world that these countries respect the US, it's citizens and really truly care about the people who lost their lives.
To build a mosque on the 911 site is adding coals to the fire of the pain that the families and friends still feel and will feel for the rest of their lives. It is an insult to their loved one's memory to build a mosque there. For them, it is a symbol of the religion that inspired it's followers to kill their loved ones indiscrimanantly.
A mosque would be more symbolic to the radical Muslim factions like this, "Yeh, we hit America hard and now we now have succeeded in putting our headquarters in place right where we wanted in America. A good place to have our sleeper cells and future bombers to meet and recruit others for Jihad." But for many Muslims, this may truly be a place of peace to them to try as a bridge to peace. But sadly, the stigma against them is there no matter what.... thanks to the radicals.
The attacks against innocent Muslims would be great and someone undoubtably at some point will try and bomb the building and take it down as a revenge for 911.
On the posting to Gary, I stated to him to Stop his hijacking. Then you must have clicked the quote button and typed in the above statement so I took it to mean as an attack on me directly.
Seriously Dave, I appreciate you pointing out UkraineGary's (AKA russianbandit) normal postings style. I did not realize that the norm for him is the inflammatory writing style that may well distort the true facts of a topic. Guess some people deliberately don't want to be corrected so as to be able to sit back and watch people fight.
He and a couple of other memebers who are regular posters are very similar in their inflammatory writing style.
I'll just step aside and sit back and watch him put his foot in his mouth. Someone else will snarl and hiss and surely bite his rump a bit more. Let the show begin, eh?
Gary, I'm not going to waste anymore of my time with you as you continue to make excuses on this forum for what you really don't know and try to bamboozle us to think you do.
Yes, it's your thread and I will gladly step aside and let you continue to open your mouth as you have been doing and insert your foot into it.
C'mon Dave, can't you see where the OP suddenly changed the subject when he was corrected? And he was even corrected by several different people who knew firsthand about the topic. Now that's highjacking it. And you're trying to hijack it too by attacking me here with a comment that has nothing to do with the forum topic. Get back on course and answer his question(s) or please remain silent.
Sorry, my personal threads I do not hijack but several of the posters have done so on my threads. And when I and others try to bring those hijackers back to the point of the topic, it is very difficult to do. When they have nothing to say or contribute to the topic, they become verbally abusive to me and other posters, hijack the thread and veer off course. They want no one to post an opinion or fact different than what they want. They cause the threads to get locked.
It's hard enough getting the OP back on course with his own topic but you don't have to contribute to hijacking this thread either with your comment to me that has nothing to do with the forum topic.
How about you getting back on thread topic after this unless you have nothing to say worthwhile? I will not reply to anything you write to me that is inflammatory from this point on.
Then how come you are posting continuously throughout this forum sweetheart? You write a reply to anything that you don't like from Costa, Conrad, Alberta, myself and anyone else that doesn't agree with you.
IT'S OBVIOUS THAT YOU READ THE FORUM POSTINGS, INCLUDING WHAT I WRITE OR YOU WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN WRITTEN THIS COMMENT TO ME. HA!! GOTATCHA BIRCHIE
You are making generalizations Gary based on your own opinion about the IRA. You really do not know what most folks of this world feel about the IRA. I have to agree with Conrad that you would probably get a better poll from the British and the Irish forum posters who are much more closely involved in the political arena in that area of the world.
Am sorry Gary that you mistakenly perceive me as knowing nothing about Hamas but rest assure, please don't generalize that I know nothing about Hamas. Perhaps it is you that is a bit sheltered or very busy and do not read or watch the news. Am not trying to be disrespectful to you in any way whatsoever.
They have made their politics well known to the world in publicly shown training videos and in their charter constitution and sadly, their atrocious behaviors to even their fellow Palestinians. Without even putting Israel in the mix, consider their murderous behaviors to the West Bank Palestinians and the shootings of their own people for any infractions of Sharia Islamic laws. Even robbing the UN warehouse of humanitarian aide last year. I believe there is a web site called
that displays much of their Hamas training videos. Sad to see how they train little children to kill. Use their children as child soldiers and are proud to show the world the videos of this. Would you want your child to be trained from such a young age to kill? That is the norm in Gaza.From the videos shown, there are women who literally proudly proclaim that they produce their children to volunteer them to be suicide bombers. There are many more videos that would send chills up your spine to even view. Only then perhaps would you understand what Israel faces if you were to have to come up against the Hamas regime. You would want the strongest weaponry available to stop them . It is not for innocent infractions on humanity that they have been internationally identified as a terrorist organization.
Anyone who is pro IRA or anti IRA may come back with a heated discussion. In asking that question, people may well perceive that that you feel that IRA is a terrorist group, especially considering you are beating on the Israelis so much. I have never taken sides on the IRA issue as I don't know the historical facts well enough to make a judgement call on that one. I think that perhaps people who are much closer to the issue personally may be better qualified to give you an answer.
I'm not trying to avoid your poll Gary...it's just that I can't answer it.
Me thinks that you may make some enemies from our Irish CS members. There was one lady poster here awhile back who was very pro IRA and she had some very sound reasoning too. I can only hope that she sees this posting and answers your poll.
911 has everything to do with Palestine. The Muslim terrorists wanted to destroy the US for their support of Israel. Most were Saudis.
The Saudi bluff (excerpts from Israel Harel article Haaretz News 25 Jun 2010
The "Arab peace initiative" (or, more accurately, "the Saudi initiative" ) was born shortly after the devastating 9/11 terror attacks, when the status of the Arab world - and especially of the terrorists' native countries, first and foremost Saudi Arabia - was at a nadir.
To anyone with eyes in his head, it was clear that the peace plan was a public relations exercise.
Thus, for instance, they tried in various ways to whitewash the clause that demanded "a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194."The right of return - with all its implications for Israel's demographic future - is also enshrined with a clause forbidding Arab states from granting citizenship to the Palestinians who fled there in 1948-'49, or to any of their descendants.
If the fires of peace are truly burning in the bones of Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, the initiative's sponsor, then why does he not fly to Israel to discuss it directly with the Israelis, as Anwar Sadat did in 1977?
What would we say, if the Arabs were to ignore an Israeli peace initiative for more than eight years?" What should Israel say about the fact that for more than eight years, the Arabs have abstained, and even fled, from doing anything to advance the peace initiative that they themselves proposed?
If they want to study the root causes of behavior, as academics are indeed supposed to do, the first thing they ought to be studying is the Arabs' behavior.
Saudi Arabia and the Arab League have been silent for fear that Israel actually does want to reach an agreement. And agreements are reached via negotiations.
They are not even ready to recognize Israel's right to establish a national home for the Jewish people here.
In answer to your question...b]The Saudi bluff [/b]
The "Arab peace initiative" AKA "the Saudi initiative" was born shortly after the devastating 9/11 terror attacks, when the status of the Arab world - and especially of the terrorists' native countries, first and foremost Saudi Arabia - was at a nadir.
Thus, for instance, they tried in various ways to whitewash the clause that demanded "a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194."
The right of return - with all its implications for Israel's demographic future - is also enshrined with a clause forbidding Arab states from granting citizenship to the Palestinians who fled there in 1948-'49, or to any of their descendants.
If the fires of peace are truly burning in the bones of Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, the initiative's sponsor, then why does he not fly to Israel to discuss it directly with the Israelis, as Anwar Sadat did in 1977? Why not present the initiative on the floor of the Knesset, and then make a pilgrimage to the holy sites, to worship Allah at the Haram al-Sharif (Temple Mount )?
Why not discuss the initiative privately with the Israeli prime minister and meet with some of those who oppose it to convince them that the plan does not harbor any threat to Israel's future? After all, nothing could ensure Israel's survival better than peace.
And then Israelis and Arabs would dwell together in peace on the land where Isaac and Ishmael, the respective fathers of their nations, once trod.
"What would we say," my colleague Akiva Eldar wrote in these pages on Tuesday, "if the Arabs were to ignore an Israeli peace initiative for more than eight years?" But at least in this case, the question ought to be the opposite: What should Israel say - and what should the participants at that conference in Be'er Sheva have said - about the fact that for more than eight years, the Arabs have abstained, and even fled, from doing anything to advance the peace initiative that they themselves proposed? If they want to study the root causes of behavior, as academics are indeed supposed to do, the first thing they ought to be studying is the Arabs' behavior.
Saudi Arabia and the Arab League have been silent for fear that Israel actually does want to reach an agreement. And agreements are reached via negotiations.
In other words, they, too, would have to make concessions - on Resolution 194, for example. And also on turning East Jerusalem, including the Holy Basin, into the Arab world's exclusive property. And for this, the Arabs (including the Palestinians ) are not at all ready.
They are not even ready to recognize Israel's right to establish a national home for the Jewish people here. Thus they were satisfied with scoring a lasting public relations coup, which continues to yield benefits to this day - thanks, among other things, to that conference at Ben-Gurion University.
After all, even Benjamin Netanyahu has adopted the formula of two states for two peoples. And that is something that the Saudis and the Palestinians do not really want. Israel Harel
Let's have a CS rally and take up a collection for an El Al airlines passenger ticket to send Gary back to the Ukraine. All in favor raise your hand. Long Live Israel!! I'm being nice....no offense Gary and I tell it like it is too!!
Something isn't quite right with what you're telling us sir. Your last fiancee after CJ was head over heels in love with you. She even made several trips over there to visit with you, get to know you and spend quality time together. She announced on CS that you were both getting married. She fought with members here on CS over her love and dedication to you and even over some dispicable behavior towards CJ that was posted on a forum that was eventually pulled. So it was very obvious that her emotions and feelings were quite strong for you for quite awhile. So something must have changed to make you tell us that she "threw you over."
I don't buy into this that she just "threw you over". I have a strong hunch that there's more to the story that you are not telling us.
Usually there is another woman involved on the side somewhere whereby a man is stepping out behind the back of the woman whom he is engaged to. Don't know if that is the situation but like I said, a woman just doesn't break off with a man whom she is so devoted to, fought for and is awaiting to be married to without a very good reason.
Again, it's only a hunch on my part and I could be wrong. If I'm wrong, then I truly will give you an apology. But if I'm right, then you owe your fiancee an apology. I will say that in a strong truly committed deep loving relationship, I believe that neither of the partners will step out on each other and can be always be trusted not to breach that committment to each other, no matter how many miles or years keeps them apart until they are together.
Physical desires should not become more important than the affairs of the heart in a committed loving relationship if you really want something to last. Unless you both are in agreement that it is OK to run around on each other. It is each couple together that chooses the terms that will work to keep their relationship alive.
No matter what, I'm sorry to hear that you two are not together at this time. I was hoping that she would have been your soulmate you were seeking as you had much in common with farming and animal care. Best wishes to you for success at some point in your life finding a permanent lifelong committed relationship.
And a 1 and a 2 and a 3 let's all go:: Twinkle Twinkle little star, Birchie's mind has gone afar, Up above the world so high, his imagination makes one sigh, Like a rush he goes so high,
Here's to you Birchie now don't you cry
Luv and Hugz to ya Birchie sweetheart We love ya and we know that you are deliberately razzing us all here
I'd give you some credibility if only you could read the words: CURRENT EVENTS AND POLITICS in the forum topics section.If you don't think it belongs here, then you wouldn't be reading it or posting to it. Why are you reading it in the first place if you don't think it belongs in the dating site political forum section?
Perhaps you should be looking at the Broken Hearts, Travel or Dating and Relating forums.
Since about 7:30am, I see that you have repeated yourself with the same stuff 10x. Same old, same old.
Really, I do really like to read what you have to say, even if I don't agree with it, but saying the same identical words page after page does get old. Perk it up dude!!
How about quitting your ranting on this morning and repeating yourself over and over? At least read the news and contribute something new to this forum for a change.
Perhaps you did not sleep well last night and are grouchy this morning? You're trolling the waters looking for a fight. And I will be no part of your game plan this morning.
Please stop the COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT on us first thing in the morning. I should like to enjoy my morning cup of java. Dearie, are you having a caffeine withdrawal perhaps? Now that can make a person a bit grouchy. I'll have to call in Sassy49 to straighten you out. Sassy.....where are U?
I think that if Saudi Arabia was attacked again and it was Israel coming to the rescue, I do believe that Saudi Arabia would gladly clear the skies for Israel to pass.
Think about it for a moment. If the different moderate arab countries were attacked and taken over 1 by 1 much like Europe was overtaken during WW2, then I believe that they would gladly open their skies for anyone to fly over to save them. Their main hope over there would be for Israel and the US to save their butts. JMHO guys!
Good morning all of you!! I'll post here excerpts from an article from yesterdays's Haaretz News regarding a proposed flotilla from Lebanon. Let's be civil this morning, hold our tempers and be more constructive in our conversations please, it's getting hotter outside today, here and overseas. The dude cussing me yesterday really got a bit overheated at the moment. Can only hope he did something to cool himself down a bit.
Report:
Earlier Sunday, Haaretz reported that Israel had initiated diplomatic efforts designed to prevent the departure of at least one vessel, carrying 50 to 70 Lebanese women and food aid. Israel has been in touch with the UN, United States, France, Spain and Germany. It has also been speaking with the Vatican because the ship is expected to include several dozen Catholic nuns.
However, according to the Al-Hayat report, it is possible that the flotilla would not be allowed to leave Lebanese shores, as Lebanon forbids a vessel departing one of its ports to reach a port under Israeli occupation. This fact has led Lebanon officials to estimate that organizers would submit a travel plan to a different destination, perhaps Cyprus, only to change course during the course of their voyage.
Sources have also told Al-Hayat that organizers failed to appeal the government for the necessary permits, which include authorizing their departure as well as their travel.
Lebanese officials told the Arab daily that the bureaucratic procedures needed to approve such an endeavor included authorizing the ship's permit by the Lebanese ministry of transportation, including the approving the intended travelers, as well as the type of cargo the flotilla is to hold.
A senior Lebanese official added that, regardless of the procedures required, Lebanese law did not permit the transport of weapons on board ships.
Lebanon's Minister of Labor Ghazi Al Aridi told Lebanon's Al-Nahar that no official "request regarding the flotilla had been submitted," saying that Lebanon would not "allow anyone to preach us over our support of the Palestinians, but there are rules and they must be followed."
Earlier Sunday, Israel informed the United Nations and - through diplomatic channels - the Lebanese government that it reserves the right to use all means necessary to stop ships seeking to breach the naval blockade on the Gaza Strip.
In a letter to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Israel warned that the attempt by the organizers to sail from Lebanon and deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza could escalate tensions and affect peace and security in the region.
"Israel reserves its right under international law to use all necessary means to prevent these ships from violating the existing naval blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip," wrote Israel's ambassador to the UN, Gabriela Shalev.
Well good morning Birchie. My morning is going OK so far. Just tuned in to see what kind of banter is going on this morning on the forum. What's going on in your neck of the woods this morning?
LILLYLADY Forum Posts (1,293)
You tube
RE: do you believe
OK doc, is that the best swipe at me you could give? You're off topic and are hijacking your thread. Continue on with your swipes or continue on with your main forum topic. The choice is in your ballpark. Neeeeexxxxt!!