Quote: "They do build homes on land they don't own, but that's on the other side of the world and not our concern."
Turn your brain back on.
Libertarians are often, perhaps always fiercely anti religion. There is some merit to that position, but also quite a bit of fault.
Occupied land taken defensively in a war, while not owned, is under the control of the victorious sovereign nation occupying it until there is a definitive end to the conflict and terms are decided upon regarding said land.
So by the same token, it's good to see you're a proponent of squatter's rights here in America.
Until banks or lenders can produce proof of ownership after subdividing mortgages and selling them off for profit, then there is no reason for a squatter[[borrower) to remove himself from any vacant premises, which is right and good in my book.
I say give judges the power to cancel mortgages, as was done in NY for a family facing foreclosure against the egregious Indymac One West Bank.
Wonder what the lovely spokesmodel Dana Peron would think of that one, being such a kind-hearted, intelligent [[choke) conservative person?
cc they ALSO HAVE RESPONSIBILITIES under international laws.
Neither the sniper nor the VT shooter shouted allah akbar during their murder sprees. the man at Fort Hood did do just that. He is a home grown islamic terrorist.
And I am pretty sure abortion doc killers say something similar. Home grown Christian fundamentalist terrorists.
We should have "random" screenings on all passengers or people who look like them too.
so the french resistance were nothing but terrorists?
So you think it's okay to discriminate against someone because of words that came out of his mouth? You know we have this thing called the First Amendment, right?
Missed the phrase "taken defensively" libs...try again.
actually -- no
the nazis claimed to be taking France as a defensive action
So what delineates a "terrorist" from a "nut job"? It hasn't been demonstrated that he acted as an agent for any organization, which I would think would be a determining factor.
Typical conservative thought: Muslim = terrorist, so any bad act by a Muslim is ipso facto a terrorist act.
So they can settle people on it if they want? That's nothing more than de facto annexation. Israel will never "disenfranchise" the settlers by giving that land to a Palestinian state, nor even giving it back to Jordan and Egypt from whom they took it.
It would be more honest if they just came out and said, "We've decided to keep it." Better yet, they could have said that 40 years ago.
Seems the Israeli government is powerless to enforce its own laws on its own people. Doesn't bode well.
Yes, it is annexation in the absence of a treaty upon the cessation of war.
So why are they not announcing it? Why not just come out and say, "We're going to keep it."?
I'm just dying to hear why conservatives make excuses for continuing to support these liars.
Would that help you Elganned? How?
Islamic terrorists are fighting for freedom? How so?
They are fighting for their version of 'freedom' and are commanded by their god to purge the earth of our brand of wickedness. perverse to us, but to them, a goal worth dying for.
Maybe if the last 8 years of Cowboy diplomacy had a lot more diplomacy and a lot less cowboy, we'd not be mired in two un-winnable wars against an enemy that is fighting for a reward that can only come through dying in battle.
|
Bookmarks