What is Your Political Opinion of "V for Vendetta"?

[Gawd]

The children are collateral damage. That's a term VERY familiar to the US and Israeli military.

[Jason]

But when one of them blows up a bus full of civilians in Tel Aviv, I still get to call the bomber a terrorist, no matter what his cause was.

That's nice, but you lack the ability to make it a universal principle.

Unless a person using a hammer is a 'hammerist' and a person driving a car is to be a 'driverist'. If you wish to label someone by the tool they use you'll have to justify it as the universal principle you claim it is - address the limitless counter-examples.

Hmm.. I thought what I wrote was clear enough. :S

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Why would I bother?

Unlike you, I am not bigoted, racist and irrationally biased toward one group of humans over another.

I want to see how much you have to criticize about the Palestinians.

I was writing a long reply to this. But you really aren't worth bothering with. Honestly, I have far more compassion for suicide bombers than I have for those that cheer them on from the shadows.

[Jason]

Why would I bother?

Unlike you, I am not bigoted, racist and irrationally biased toward one group of humans over another.

I want to see how much you have to criticize about the Palestinians.

I was writing a long reply to this. But you really aren't worth bothering with. Honestly, I have far more compassion for suicide bombers than I have for those that cheer them on from the shadows.

Why is that? They saved you the trouble of killing them?

.. sorry couldn't resist.

[Gawd]

Why would I bother?

Unlike you, I am not bigoted, racist and irrationally biased toward one group of humans over another.

I want to see how much you have to criticize about the Palestinians.

I was writing a long reply to this. But you really aren't worth bothering with. Honestly, I have far more compassion for suicide bombers than I have for those that cheer them on from the shadows.

What would you have wrote if this was the time of Apartheid in South Africa and I was posting articles criticizing the Whites? That I'm too harsh on the Whites and should blame the Blacks instead?

[Ian]

The children are collateral damage. That's a term VERY familiar to the US and Israeli military.

No, they're not collateral damage if they were the ones that were deliberately targeted. And a suicide bomber sitting on a bus knows full well that he's surrounded by a bunch of civilians, including kids.

A mortar attack on an IDF checkpoint that inadvertently goes astray and kills a nearby kid - that is collateral damage. There is a difference of intent. And intent is incredibly important.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Why would I bother?

Unlike you, I am not bigoted, racist and irrationally biased toward one group of humans over another.

I want to see how much you have to criticize about the Palestinians.

I was writing a long reply to this. But you really aren't worth bothering with. Honestly, I have far more compassion for suicide bombers than I have for those that cheer them on from the shadows.

What would you have wrote if this was the time of Apartheid in South Africa and I was posting articles criticizing the Whites? That I'm too harsh on the Whites and should blame the Blacks instead?

A very apt analogy. Black and white: the only way you see things. Somebody is RIGHT and the other guy is WRONG. No in-betweens. No shades of grey. No quarter given. Listen to yourself. You're a fucking cliché.

[Gawd]

The children are collateral damage. That's a term VERY familiar to the US and Israeli military.

No, they're not collateral damage if they were the ones that were deliberately targeted. And a suicide bomber sitting on a bus knows full well that he's surrounded by a bunch of civilians, including kids.

A mortar attack on an IDF checkpoint that inadvertently goes astray and kills a nearby kid - that is collateral damage. There is a difference of intent. And intent is incredibly important.

The intent is to tell the Israelis to get the fuck out.

[Gawd]

Why would I bother?

Unlike you, I am not bigoted, racist and irrationally biased toward one group of humans over another.

I want to see how much you have to criticize about the Palestinians.

I was writing a long reply to this. But you really aren't worth bothering with. Honestly, I have far more compassion for suicide bombers than I have for those that cheer them on from the shadows.

What would you have wrote if this was the time of Apartheid in South Africa and I was posting articles criticizing the Whites? That I'm too harsh on the Whites and should blame the Blacks instead?

A very apt analogy. Black and white: the only way you see things. Somebody is RIGHT and the other guy is WRONG. No in-betweens. No shades of grey. No quarter given. Listen to yourself. You're a fucking cliché.

What were the "in-betweens" in Apartheid South Africa? Regale me with tales.

[Ian]

The children are collateral damage. That's a term VERY familiar to the US and Israeli military.

No, they're not collateral damage if they were the ones that were deliberately targeted. And a suicide bomber sitting on a bus knows full well that he's surrounded by a bunch of civilians, including kids.

A mortar attack on an IDF checkpoint that inadvertently goes astray and kills a nearby kid - that is collateral damage. There is a difference of intent. And intent is incredibly important.

The intent is to tell the Israelis to get the fuck out.

By deliberately killing children.

[Pappa]

What were the "in-betweens" in Apartheid South Africa? Regale me with tales.

Oh, they're the "coloureds"... and they're despised even more than the blacks.

[Gawd]

The children are collateral damage. That's a term VERY familiar to the US and Israeli military.

No, they're not collateral damage if they were the ones that were deliberately targeted. And a suicide bomber sitting on a bus knows full well that he's surrounded by a bunch of civilians, including kids.

A mortar attack on an IDF checkpoint that inadvertently goes astray and kills a nearby kid - that is collateral damage. There is a difference of intent. And intent is incredibly important.

The intent is to tell the Israelis to get the fuck out.

By deliberately killing children.

You're grasping at straws, Ian. The Palestinians don't target school buses, just regular public ones.

[Jason]

I'm not convinced at your assumption that they deliberately kill children.

In your given example they knowingly blow up a bus having foreknowledge that there are children on that bus. I find that hard to believe. I think it's more down to chance. By the same logic we might call a car drive a terrorist - they knowingly drive a potentially lethal weapon in areas where there are children.

You're continually exchanging the tool for the intent, and regularly missing the real intent as well. I wish to build a deck, to do that I have to hammer nails. The intent is to build a deck and the tool is the hammer.

These 'terrorists' wish to achieve something beyond the explosion of the bus, of terrorizing the public, even of killing themselves. To achieve this they have to do things, like blowing up buses or hammering nails. The intent is to achieve something significant and the tool is terrorism.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

What were the "in-betweens" in Apartheid South Africa? Regale me with tales.

Oh, they're the "coloureds"... and they're despised even more than the blacks.

And then we can talk about the hatred between the Afrikaans and the English speaking whites, and the disputes between different black tribes (Pretty much the Zulus against everyone else!) And then we could talk about the terrorist acts carried out by blacks on any old white they happened to find. And, of course, the reprisals by white-supremacists against any old black they happened to find hanging around.

Whenever any group of humans starts doing the old "groupthink" thing, some other group of humans (with a different skin-colour, race, religion, hairstyle or choice in interior decoration) is going to get bitched.

But of course, you are totally right in pointing out that, when one group is palestinian and the other is filthy, baby-eating JOOZ, it is far easier to tell which group is RIGHT.

[Ian]

The children are collateral damage. That's a term VERY familiar to the US and Israeli military.

No, they're not collateral damage if they were the ones that were deliberately targeted. And a suicide bomber sitting on a bus knows full well that he's surrounded by a bunch of civilians, including kids.

A mortar attack on an IDF checkpoint that inadvertently goes astray and kills a nearby kid - that is collateral damage. There is a difference of intent. And intent is incredibly important.

The intent is to tell the Israelis to get the fuck out.

By deliberately killing children.

You're grasping at straws, Ian. The Palestinians don't target school buses, just regular public ones.

Are you shitting me? What's the difference? What a cold and cowardly response.

You're the one reaching for straws. I'm not talking semantics, I'm talking about what really happens. A suicide bomber killing a couple dozen civilians is excused from being considered a terrorist and child killer because he doesn't expect there to be many kids around? Even if they can see them nearby before they press the button? They have killed a great many children, deliberately, whether you want to admit it or not.