PDA

View Full Version : Fred Thompson coming to Israel



jetdawgg
06-18-07, 09:32 AM
Bought by AIPAC!!!!!!!!!!!





Fred Thompson, US presidential hopeful and former star of the hit television series “Law & Order,” is scheduled to make his first visit to Israel in the coming days.

Thompson, who is said to have a fair chance of winning the Republican presidential nomination, will meet with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and various other senior officials during his tour of Israel.
Of the dozen or so candidates contesting the nomination, Thompson is among the most supportive of Israel.

The former actor, who has also served as a US senator, bucked popular international sentiment by insisting in a hard-hitting editorial column that Israel has been almost too careful in its war on Palestinian terrorism.

“Israel is at war,” Thompson wrote for the conservative website Townhall.com. And the Jewish state has gone to “incredible lengths to stop the war against them without harming Palestinian non-combatants.”

Thompson is also on record as supporting an Israeli military strike agai
nst Iran should international diplomacy fail to prevent the Islamic Republic from obtaining nuclear arms.
More liberal political elements in Israel fear Thompson may be too far to the right, and therefore end up harming Israel. During his time as a senator, Thompson was one of the sponsors of the Jerusalem Embassy Act demanding that the US government move its embassy to the Israeli capital in defiance of Palestinian claims to the city.



http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=12993

Sgt Leprechaun
06-18-07, 07:40 PM
At least Fred has the guts to speak his mind and do what he believes is right. There is nothing wrong with being pro Isreal.

HOLM
06-18-07, 07:47 PM
There is nothing wrong with being pro Isreal.

There is in the mind of an Anti Semite...

They don't complain when Pelosi heads to Sryia

Sgt Leprechaun
06-18-07, 08:11 PM
Naturally. Well, heck, she went to Syria to undercut administration policy, so she was obviously doing the work "of the angels".

Let me go and get some more Kool Aide so I, too, can march merrily along!

JCam0331
06-18-07, 08:29 PM
There is in the mind of an Anti Semite...

They don't complain when Pelosi heads to Sryia

actually a lot of people complained when she went to Syria (especially neocons)

I see nothing wrong with it.

Negotiation is a tool. Warfare alone will not solve anything in the Mid East.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-18-07, 09:04 PM
Oh, naturally it won't. And I suppose "surrender now" will solve everything as well?

There is that 'neocon' word again. Boy, the progressive crowd sure loves it. I guess it's supposed to be an insult.

Which non NeoCons complained when Speaker Nancy decided to go off and make foriegn policy on her own?

erased
06-18-07, 09:07 PM
Funny... no mention of the several republicans she went to Syria with.

JCam0331
06-18-07, 09:08 PM
Neocon isn't an insult. Its just terminology for a group of people who share certain political beliefs.

It'd be no different than "liberals"

I don't know what Speaker Pelosi did in Syria, but I see nothing wrong with a token of goodwill visit to Syria.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-18-07, 09:20 PM
Ah. A 'token' goodwill visit to a country directly sponsoring terrorism in it's many forms, by a person not authorized to make foreign policy for the administration.

Yeah, that works.

What kind of deals did ole Nancy make over there, I wonder?

jetdawgg
06-19-07, 08:46 AM
Ah. A 'token' goodwill visit to a country directly sponsoring terrorism in it's many forms, by a person not authorized to make foreign policy for the administration.

Yeah, that works.

What kind of deals did ole Nancy make over there, I wonder?

Oh I forgot, the unilateral stance of this admin has worked wonders.

erased
06-19-07, 01:23 PM
What kind of deals she made? I guess we could ask Robert Aderholt of Alabama, Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania and Frank Wolf of Virginia who all spoke with Assad, but this didn't make the news because it'd make it real hard for Bush to slam Pelosi when his boys were doing the same thing. No mention of David L. Hobson (R) Ohio, who accompanied Pelosi as well as 5 other democratic lawmakers

sdk87to91
06-19-07, 01:55 PM
shame on them too. Two wrongs dont make a right. Members of any party who cant follow the rules are just as guilty. It is more likely that they were not tarred and feathered because of Pelosi's involvement. The media would not want to draw any more attention.

drumcorpssnare
06-19-07, 02:03 PM
JCam0331- "Negotiation is a tool." I agree with that statement, but that "tool" only works when all parties involved are interested in negotiating.

Our jihadist enemies have no desire to negotiate. At all. Ever. Period.

They want their Islamic nations to be run by Islamic religious law. No secular govt. No influence of any kind, at all, other than the Qua'ran and the hadith.
They want zero western influence. Not even humanitarian aid, which they see as a "trick" of the "unbelievers."

They have sworn to continue to kill in the name of Allah, until all vestiges of non-Islamic law are removed from their lives. They even justify killing fellow Moslems who are not 100% "believers." They consider their current fight as merely a continuation of the Crusades...a battle against imperialism, nationalism, liberalism, modernism....( You get the point...)

So, they don't want to talk, or negotiate, or "have a dialouge"... They want to kill us.

drumcorpssnare:usmc:

jetdawgg
06-19-07, 03:11 PM
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/01/30/923/48708



Our first response: "We don't deal with terrorists." But what happens when an organization whose name is often associated with terrorism suddenly gains respectability? Why should our first response to the election be relabelling Hamas as a terrorist organization when it holds a majority of the legislative seats in Palestine? As shown by the news yesterday, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan's pronouncement last Wednesday (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/20060125.html#i) ("We do not deal with Hamas. Hamas is a terrorist organization. Under current circumstances, I don't see any change in that.") may have to change as Rice recognizes reality.


Seeing as what is happening there today, negotiations may have helped....

drumcorpssnare
06-19-07, 03:42 PM
jetdawgg- Sure, technically Hamas holds a majority in Palestine....and did they achieve that majority through free elections? Or was it maybe through death threats, murder, torture...ya know...the usual Hamas tactics?
Hamas has declared publicly and repeatedly, they want to see an end to the State of Israel. They have the same ideologies as the other jihadists....
"Death to all unbelievers!!!"

Anyone who negotiates with them is foolish, in my opinion.

They need to be given an ultimatum, which is to say, "There will be no negotiating!"

"Cease your murderous terrorist tactics of killing innocents in the name of Allah, or suffer the consequences!":evilgrin:

drumcorpssnare:usmc:

jetdawgg
06-19-07, 03:45 PM
jetdawgg- Sure, technically Hamas holds a majority in Palestine....and did they achieve that majority through free elections? Or was it maybe through death threats, murder, torture...ya know...the usual Hamas tactics?
Hamas has declared publicly and repeatedly, they want to see an end to the State of Israel. They have the same ideologies as the other jihadists....
"Death to all unbelievers!!!"

Anyone who negotiates with them is foolish, in my opinion.

They need to be given an ultimatum, which is to say, "There will be no negotiating!"

"Cease your murderous terrorist tactics of killing innocents in the name of Allah, or suffer the consequences!":evilgrin:

drumcorpssnare:usmc:

Since we did not negotiate with them, I would take that as an ultimatum. How did that work out for us?

JCam0331
06-19-07, 08:56 PM
JCam0331- "Negotiation is a tool." I agree with that statement, but that "tool" only works when all parties involved are interested in negotiating.

Our jihadist enemies have no desire to negotiate. At all. Ever. Period.

They want their Islamic nations to be run by Islamic religious law. No secular govt. No influence of any kind, at all, other than the Qua'ran and the hadith.
They want zero western influence. Not even humanitarian aid, which they see as a "trick" of the "unbelievers."

They have sworn to continue to kill in the name of Allah, until all vestiges of non-Islamic law are removed from their lives. They even justify killing fellow Moslems who are not 100% "believers." They consider their current fight as merely a continuation of the Crusades...a battle against imperialism, nationalism, liberalism, modernism....( You get the point...)

So, they don't want to talk, or negotiate, or "have a dialouge"... They want to kill us.

drumcorpssnare:usmc:

1st of all - Syria is a nationstate, not a terrorist group. They may be sympathetic toward certain terrorist groups, but the threat of economic sanctions and the combined might of the US military as well as dangling of a few carrots should be enough to bring even Syria to the negotiating table.

HOLM
06-19-07, 09:13 PM
1st of all - Syria is a nationstate, not a terrorist group. They may be sympathetic toward certain terrorist groups, but the threat of economic sanctions and the combined might of the US military as well as dangling of a few carrots should be enough to bring even Syria to the negotiating table.



Speak softly.. and carry a big stick...


I am completely opposed to "talking tough" if you have no plans of doing chit about it...


That is what landed our ass's in Iraq... 8 yrs of Clinton threats with no action.....

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 06:26 AM
Well said drum. Yes, god forbid we not get permission from the UN to act in our own best interests. Which is another 'kettle calls pot black' tidbit of info the libs/progressives often use. On one hand, we get slammed for acting 'unilaterally', but on the other, because 'we are the only superpower' "we" are expected to go into various and sundry 3rd world mudhut nations and 'fix/feed/clothe' them gratis.

When we don't, we are somehow 'evil'.

Again a case of the left thinking with their glands and not their brain housing group.

erased
06-20-07, 06:40 AM
I must be liberal this morning because I fail to see the similarities between killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and feeding hundreds of thousands of refugees in Darfur (aside from the numbers).

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 07:33 AM
"We" have killed 'hundreds of thousands' of Iraqis, have we?

jetdawgg
06-20-07, 09:19 AM
Speak softly.. and carry a big stick...


I am completely opposed to "talking tough" if you have no plans of doing chit about it...


That is what landed our ass's in Iraq... 8 yrs of Clinton threats with no action.....

5 years of this admin. NO PLAN:usmc:

jetdawgg
06-20-07, 09:22 AM
"We" have killed 'hundreds of thousands' of Iraqis, have we?

Iraqi Security Forces and Civilian Deaths Details (http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx)
Note: Iraqi deaths based on news reports . This is not a definitive count. Actual totals for Iraqi deaths are higher than the numbers recorded on this site

http://icasualties.org/oif/

erased
06-20-07, 09:58 AM
"We" have killed 'hundreds of thousands' of Iraqis, have we?

Even if it isn't us directly... which it is quite often, they weren't blowing each other up before we went in and mucked it all up.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 09:58 AM
8 years of Clinton threats.....I'd say that was also 'no plan' as well.

Note also that site you quote includes Iraqi military force casualties. It also states this, which assumes a higher total. "Assumes" that is.

<TABLE id=Table1 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="WIDTH: 219px" vAlign=top></TD><TD vAlign=top>This is not a complete list, nor can we verify these totals. This is simply a compilation of deaths reported by news agencies. Actual totals for Iraqi deaths are much higher than the numbers recorded on this site.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

That having been said, it appears to be a comprehensive and well done site. Impressive.

It also refutes, in my opinion, the "we" have killed them all. Unless the "we" means something other than terrorists and the various factions.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 10:11 AM
Erased..you know this...how? Have you personally witnessed "us" unlawfully killing people? If so, what did you do to stop same?

Your other argument is a straw man. No, "they" weren't blowing each other up. Saddam was doing a pretty good job of that without "their" help.

erased
06-20-07, 10:14 AM
Times like this when I read the crap I post that I wish the edit button didn't have a 5-minute timer. I meant "...killing tens of thousands of Iraqis and feeding hundreds of thousands of refugees in Darfur..."

I did find this troubling though: http://icasualties.org/oif/IED.aspx

jetdawgg
06-20-07, 10:22 AM
8 years of Clinton threats.....I'd say that was also 'no plan' as well.

Note also that site you quote includes Iraqi military force casualties. It also states this, which assumes a higher total. "Assumes" that is.

<TABLE id=Table1 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="WIDTH: 219px" vAlign=top></TD><TD vAlign=top>This is not a complete list, nor can we verify these totals. This is simply a compilation of deaths reported by news agencies. Actual totals for Iraqi deaths are much higher than the numbers recorded on this site.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

That having been said, it appears to be a comprehensive and well done site. Impressive.

It also refutes, in my opinion, the "we" have killed them all. Unless the "we" means something other than terrorists and the various factions.

The Bush 'no plan' has a 500BB price tag to it and climbing with 60K US troops dead or wounded.

Thank you regarding the site. In general you will find the information that I post (sites/stories) have this level of attention. Not just some FOX Noise Channel message.

Not all Iraqis/Arabs/Muslims are terrorists

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 10:23 AM
Yeah, I've wished that myself a couple times. (For erased)

Again, tho...have 'we' killed 10's of thousands of Iraqis???

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 10:28 AM
I ALWAYS read stuff that's posted if I can. And make my own judgement based on the site, not the politics of the poster :)

It's a good site. I'm not keen on going with Reuters for their stats, but it's still done very well.

jetdawgg
06-20-07, 10:31 AM
I ALWAYS read stuff that's posted if I can. And make my own judgement based on the site, not the politics of the poster :)

It's a good site. I'm not keen on going with Reuters for their stats, but it's still done very well.

Been up for a few years now....

erased
06-20-07, 10:38 AM
Yeah, I've wished that myself a couple times. (For erased)

Again, tho...have 'we' killed 10's of thousands of Iraqis???

And again, we may not have killed them directly, but they weren't blowing each other up before we went in. In fact, some Iraqis think that the US is blowing up mosques and whatnot in efforts to further fuel the civil war.

Probably just the hippie liberal Iraqis though.;)

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 10:45 AM
"Some....think the US is blowing up...."

Yeah.....ok. And we would believe they are credible....because WHY again?

Or are you also a believer in our own homegrown idiots (yes, idiots) who believe in the 9/11 "conspiracy"?

erased
06-20-07, 10:53 AM
Same reason anyone else would be credible, I suppose.

I don't want to get into this argument here, but I will say this:

1. If there's nothing to hide, why not do a proper investigation and find out who was really behind it? Why the rush to clean it up, melt it down, and move it?

2. It wouldn't be the first time.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 11:00 AM
You've just lost all credibility with me at this point.

FYI, I was at the Pentagon on 9/11. Does that make me an 'expert'? No. But I can tell you, anyone who believes in this garbage is, without fail, a flaming moron who really needs to get a life.

It's not a point that's open to debate, discussion, or something 'reasonable people' can disagree on.

Lastly, I have read the Society of Structural Engineers report on the towers collapsing. Something you should educate yourself on, in addition to how fire really does work, as well as explosives and the like. Before you put on the tin hat with the propellor on top and spin off into the distance.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 11:26 AM
You've just lost all credibility with me at this point.

FYI, I was at the Pentagon on 9/11. Does that make me an 'expert'? No. But I can tell you, anyone who believes in this garbage is, without fail, a flaming moron who really needs to get a life.

It's not a point that's open to debate, discussion, or something 'reasonable people' can disagree on.

Lastly, I have read the Society of Structural Engineers report on the towers collapsing. Something you should educate yourself on, in addition to how fire really does work, as well as explosives and the like. Before you put on the tin hat with the propellor on top and spin off into the distance.

erased
06-20-07, 02:45 PM
You've just lost all credibility with me at this point.

FYI, I was at the Pentagon on 9/11. Does that make me an 'expert'? No. But I can tell you, anyone who believes in this garbage is, without fail, a flaming moron who really needs to get a life.

It's not a point that's open to debate, discussion, or something 'reasonable people' can disagree on.

Lastly, I have read the Society of Structural Engineers report on the towers collapsing. Something you should educate yourself on, in addition to how fire really does work, as well as explosives and the like. Before you put on the tin hat with the propellor on top and spin off into the distance.

Then you've done likewise with me. It is entirely possible to think "Hey, maybe here, like with most things, we aren't getting the whole story" and not be a raving lunatic talking about chemtrails and government mind-reading conspiracies. They're certainly not the same thing. The only reason I continue to question is because of the sensitivity and anger that people respond with when what they heard on the TV is questioned. Government complicity, aliens, whatever, I can't believe you think we have the entire story after the half hearted investigation and subsequent "wrapping up" of the entire scene. Also, not everyone who has unanswered questions believes everything in Loose Change or whatever other movies there are that say the similar things. I find it hard to believe that a reasonable person cannot see the distinction there.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 03:29 PM
Then, I fully believe that the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, the Gray Aliens are really running the gummint in conjunction with the illuminati, fire can't melt steel except under very controlled conditions, and Lee Harvey was a CIA operative secretly removed from Dallas in a black helicopter for wet work elsewhere and is secretly living in Havana while still working for the US gummint as a spy.


Ridiculous. I've debated with 9/11 conspiracy mongers in the past. It's a losing discussion, because they are convinced, by and large, that somehow the vast powers of the gummint (the same gummint that can't take care of wounded sojers, the same gummint with no plan in Iraq, the same gummint that spends 1000 bucks for a screwdriver), run by BushChimpyHitlerRumsfeldAshcroftRove & Co (a Halliburton subsidiary, INC) is capable, with the Mossad, of engineering this vast conspiracy to bring down the WTC, smash a missile into the Pentagon (while simultaneously making all the people aboard Flight 77 disappear, including the wife of the Solicitor General of the United States) and shoot down the other jet into a field in Pa to eliminate 'evidence'.

I've heard similiar rantings from people that I have put into the rubber room in my local hospital. They all sound the same, "delusional".

If you are offended or ****ed, good. You want to argue politics, I'm your guy, all day long and twice on Sunday. But arguing that 9/11 was/is some sorta conspiracy will get nothing from me but brickbats and rotten tomatoes.

Again....I was THERE. I heard THE PLANE at full A/B go over my head and into the frakin Pentagon. I felt the explosion. I saw the damage the plane did before hitting the damn building. I helped pull survivors and wounded outta that place.

I know what I know. I wasn't brainwashed by the CIA or Mossad into what I hear in my damn dreams every freakin night. That cursed plane with those doomed souls aboard going 145mph 100 feet over my head, because the raghead pilot didn't take into account Navy Annex sitting right below the Sheraton in Arlington and dropped the plane too low too fast.

I'm done with this one.

erased
06-20-07, 03:43 PM
I don't know who you're arguing with, but it doesn't seem to be me.

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 03:47 PM
Nope. You brought it up. It's you. You can gracefully bow out now and nothing more will be said.

erased
06-20-07, 03:49 PM
Wow, so you totally skip the Point-counterpoint and just go on a total rant that has nothing to do with what I said... then consider the discussion yours?

I have to question the logic and maturity in that.

HOLM
06-20-07, 03:56 PM
never mind..

Sgt Leprechaun
06-20-07, 03:58 PM
Wow, so you totally skip the Point-counterpoint and just go on a total rant that has nothing to do with what I said... then consider the discussion yours?

I have to question the logic and maturity in that.

Yep. That's me. Illogical and immature. Take it for what you will.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v660/jinelson/CautionThread.jpg