Irfan,

Sorry to disappoint you, but NO, I am not the same Leigh who puts xenophobic comments on Tim Blair’s and Peter Faris’s blogs.

I have never seen these blogs, much less posted on them. The only other “Leigh” I know of is a pathetic left-winger like you who posts on Andrew Bolt.

But, what has all this to do with the subject? Is your particular hatred for me so consuming that you have to have a go at me no matter what?

You are a sad man, Irfan

Leigh

While I am sure Irfan can speak up for himself, thought you should know that Irfan is a spokesperson FOR the LIBERAL Party on Industrial Relations. Unless I have stepped into an alternative reality - the Libs remain very conservative/mostly christian and under the inauspicious leadership of J W Howard who is very RIGHT wing indeed.

But hey, Leigh, since when did you ever let facts get in the way of a good dissen'.

I rarely respond to your consistently negative posts, but couldn't let this one go.

On topic, bombing civilians in the name of religion/politics/power/land rights is and will continue to be WRONG, regardless of where anyone sits on the politcal fence.

Leigh get it through that skull of yours; it is not about left or right, it is about the human race becoming civilised and learning that disagreements are best settled by discussion and negotiation; violence is for bullies.

Scout,

Please don't tax yourself by 'responding'to my posts; it must be expensive enough paying someone to write your own for you.

I'm amazed that anyone should think that John Howard is conservative or right wing. He is a pinko compared with what is needed to sort out the current nonsense going on in Austalia.

Scout,

I take umbrage at your latest post, where you wrote:

‘On topic, bombing civilians in the name of religion/politics/power/land rights is and will continue to be WRONG, regardless of where anyone sits on the politcal fence [sic].’

So your position is that, Hizbollah, having co-opted the Lebanese political process to suit its own, and Syria/Iran’s positions with regard to Israel, in clear contradiction of the wishes of the majority of Lebanese, is a fait accompli, and as such is beyond the legitimate authority of anybody to alter?

So what if many Lebanese distrust/dislike Hizbollah, and its policy of picking fights for them, without any mandate to do so? Hizbollah represents part of the largest minority, but by no means represents the majority of the 6 million Lebanese, with another 1 million in the diaspora.

So far I have seen many, including Mr Loewenstein, spout the Hizbollah position, namely that Israel has not completely withdrawn from Lebanon, etc. with no attempt to examine the actual extent of Hizbollah’s support within & without Lebanon. Lebanon has neither the military might, nor even (in the majority) the wish, to challenge Israel. However, until Hizbollah can be disarmed, and many accept that this can only be achieved by Israel, the Lebanese are stuck in an externally inflicted savage and unwinnable war that they neither sought nor support:

http://10452lccc.com/

This current action, whilst harming many innocent Lebanese, will cause far less harm than a civil war, which Hizbollah has promised if the Lebanese themselves attempt to put 1559 into action.

So I take it you support not the greatest good for the greatest number, but the will of the minority over all? I challenge you to read the articles with an open mind, they are not all supportive of Israel, but are overwhelmingly condemnatory of Hizbollah, seeing the current crisis not as a tragedy, but as an opportunity to finally put the past behind them.

They do not wish for a ceasefire to save Hizbollah, so why do you?

You have posted twice, therefore, you have ~24h to research.

Inshallah

2bob

Boaz says,
“Can anyone show me a time, ANY time, when the political status quo of Israel/Palestine...call it what you will, was EVER.... EVER anything other than the result of a clash of political/military wills ? “

Yes, before the invasion, dislocation and murder of the people living where Israel now conducts its god war against reality. Israel has developed a very good propaganda war, to gain the false sympathy of the world.

Where's monotheistic compassion for the 4.5 million gypsies, 20+ million Russians destroyed by the Christian Nazi. This is about religious control, nothing else. Monotheists have no use for truth, compassion, love or understanding. They display typical symptoms of psychopathic behaviour, observed in their dealings with the world.

Note how they turn on each other when they've no one to suppress around them, that's why all societies coming under religious control end up as basket cases.

Definition of monotheists, a big blob of competing psychopathic masochists, overlorded by a bunch of psychopathic sadists. The end result is always violence and death, for all.

Psychopaths try to force upon you their unsustainable view of truth, using growing abuse supported by fantasy. When presented with undeniable facts, they disappear and try to create an illusion they believe in their warped unstable minds, will give them power over you. When they're caught out in their deception, they disappear with no reply. You see it all the time on OLO, provide them with truth and they disappear, hoping you'll forget it. In their infantile unevolved minds, they think this means they've won, deep down they know they haven't,. That's when they go to war against everyone including their own, first verbally, then physically.

The Middle East won't change until either Israel, or god is removed. Israel must expand, to cater for its growth. With competing monotheists, war is inevitable, as their history shows. They've been at war for more than 2000 years, nothing's changed, just dragged everyone else into their insane barbarity.

This useless god sure is a big problem for sanity.

Small wonder Israel is considered by the majority of the world to be more of a threat to regional and world peace than Iran or Korea.

David the idea that bombing civilians is morally OK is repugnant, no matter who's doing it. The observation's been made before - a bad man can do bad things, and sometimes good things. For a good man to do bad things requires religion.