>>In Hinduism Matangi is the aspect of Devi<<im sure there should be an L at the end of it

>>She guides her devotee to the incaused primordial sound.<<like the sound of children dying from nutters dropping bombs on em?

<<Matangi has three eyes.>>and two faces?

>>She first shows Herself as Kali and then manifests nine other forms.>>how many id's you post under

>>Traditionally appearing in the cycle after Bha-gulam-ukhi,Matangi is associated with the full moon,the night of intoxication<<im noting the bloggers are active this night

seems even an attack from a tank shell on a un convoy..that follows up the attack on the un school,yesterday..that follows red-cross finding 3 children with their dead parents and family this night..[and israelie soldiers near-by ignoring their cries,

been a busy day for you lot supporting the ongoing genocide of the expelled owners of the land you stole from god

matingi quote>>I don't condone any use of nuclear weapons against civilians, but<<facinating oh three eyed one[or should that be one eyed]

<<Your problem is that you don't see war,in this case Israel vs. Hamas,as a responsive act to an act of aggression,>>>that seems a two way street[an eye for an eye?]

<<To assume that Israel and its allies should negotiate with HAMAS or Hezbollah is ridiculous>>what is rediculous is this ongoing war
murdering the people who's land you stole
what land isnt gods land?

[he didnt give it to you..the belfore letter did][your ancestors were driven off it] THIS time a letter gave it to you against gods will
[thus the land is cursed,you are the curse]

<<I don't see why people would support them.>>i dont see why u.s should support YOU except your organised lobby took over the media and usa politics via organised lobby

israel is not a people it is a religion

<<The creation of anti-Western movements from PLO to HAMAS is not a US fault as you pointed out.>>wrong mate israel allowed them both to be set up

like it controls the other egypt/siria/lebinon leaders
all stooges,as research of my previous posts would reveal

No offense One Under God, but your previous posts are erratic rants in which it is hard to pick up any coherent train of thought. You seem to go by the rules of "Play the man, not the ball."

Just to clear up some errant pre-suppositions that you seem to have about me:

- I am not a Jew

- I am not an Israeli

- I am not happy about the civilian casualities that result from the actions of a militant (terrorist) group that governs these people (ie Hamas)

- I am not "a perfect egsample (sic) of what is wrong with this whole issue," nor a "poor retarded igN0rAnus (sic)."

- I agree that "[God] is displeased with ANY life that is TAKEN in vain." This includes those civilians murdered indiscriminately by Islamists in the World Trade Centre, Bali, Madrid, London, Sderot, Baghdad, Mumbai etc.

- I pray for peace in this conflict each day, NOT the destruction of either Israel or Palestine.

HarryG,

You say >> “Work towards our goals minimising bloodshed, not advocating. Don't give up and resort to the methods of terrorists. “

1) I don’t advocate bloodshed, I simply cannot criticise the Israelis for what I see/they see as their only real option.
2) I do not accept, (and you have not shown) that Israelis have stooped to the methods of terrorists.

Indeed I have introduced evidence that the Israelis have gone to extraordinary links to avoid civilian casualties, including ringing families and advising them where the bombs are going to fall. I cannot accept any comparison between the unfortunate events at the UN school for example, (providing the Israelis are being truthful about the facts) and Hamas suicide bombings of crowded buses or restaurants. Whilst the results are similar, the intent is not. And intent will always be a pivotal factor where issues of law, and for that matter morality, are concerned.

You say >> “My opinion that peace can be obtained is forged from recent past history. Don't disparage it as just an opinion.

1) I was not disparaging peace as a concept I was suggesting specifically that Hamas is not interested in making peace with Israel until it has fulfilled the goals set out in its charter.
2) You have not presented any evidence to the contrary.

You say >> “Most of our talk has centred on Hamas, despised or feared by most of the world; they have no ally in the Arab world except Hezbollah”

You see to be ignoring the fact that there is a large amount of anti-Israeli sentiment globally at the very best of times. Hamas may not have the full support of the majority of the global community, but you won’t see ANY pressure from these nations to have Hamas stand aside.

You say >> “If Israel were interested in peace with Palestine … they should be progressing those talks with Abbas now, marginalising Hamas still further.”

This is a misrepresentation of the likely outcome of such a course of action. Talking with Abbas won’t stop Hamas rockets.

TBC

CONT’

Indeed Hamas don’t even accept Abbas’ authority to make deals with the Israelis. Secondly, giving any Palestinians concessions whilst Israel and Hamas are at war will undoubtedly lead to more violence as Hamas will see such moves as accruing directly from their acts of violence. This just reinforces Hamas’ widely held belief that if Israel are attacked often enough for long enough they will cave in.

You say >> “Do you think that if Hamas agreed to, and stuck by, a peace deal, then Israel would leave the occupied territories, pull down the wall, extend a hand of friendship to Palestine?

I believe if Hamas renounced their commitment to violence, accepted Israel’s right to exist and agreed to a deal like the one offered to Arafat at Camp David, then Israel would do those most of those things. Extending the hand of friendship is a bit much, but I fully believe that Israel would remove the wall and abide by the land agreements. Israel is highly reliant upon its allies and could not get away with shirking its agreements even if it wanted, which I doubt.

You say >> “What will the present Israeli action spawn? As China rises, the US wonders why it loses respect.”

China’s human rights abuses place it in another realm altogether to the United States. Anyone looking to China for moral leadership is seriously misguided. Whilst I accept that there is a lot of criticism of Israel and the US at the moment I don’t believe the vast majority of opposition (ie other than western-liberal-elite opposition) is moral opposition, for reasons I’ve made clear. I believe that it is almost entirely political.

You have not commented on the question of whether the allies were “torturing” the civilian population in the case I raised. The attacks in Gaza bear NO similarity to the events in Dresden or Nagasaki or Hiroshima. Either in intent or outcome. I am surprised this confused you.

I will leave you with a cartoon from my favourite paper, the Australian, today. It entitled “ Hush your putting yourself at risk” http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/gallery/0,26637,5024287-20581,00.html#

Dear MaNiK_JoSiAh,

I refer to your post of Friday, 9 January 2009 12:06:55 AM.

Is it so hard to tell that I was being ironic? The question of negotiating with Hamas, of legitimizing their organization (let alone their goals) is so manifestly absurd that it seems to warrant little more than an absurd response. I am surprised to see that people reading my post have actually taken it literally! My response was intended as a sarcastic rejoinder to the Lowenstein/Slezak article. I was extending their analysis to an even-more absurd conclusion. My apologies for any confusion that may have resulted...my rather warped sense of humour is obviously not shared by many.

Matangi

I am sure you will agree that it is difficult to debate issues with the 350 word limit, but you make it more difficult by not reading what is written. You have metaphorically "shot off your mouth" without reading or thinking. You refer to my "pathetic" attack on America, and ramble on about use of nuclear weapons against Japan in WWII. I did not criticise America in that regard, except I called into question the need for the second bomb (on Nagasaki). This was in response to a red herring raised by PaulL when he raised the subject of British bombing of Cologne, wasting even more words.

In one of his earlier posts, Paul L had asked "Do you imagine that Israelis don’t feel the same pain when one of Hamas’ hundreds of rockets actually hits its target?" the implication being that I do not condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas. I certainly do condemn it, as surely I have made clear, though I can understand it; just as I can understand why Israel fires upon Gaza. By making such a spurious point, PaulL wastes some of those valuable 350 words, and I have to waste words pointing this out to him because he has a clear reluctance to try to understand the points I am making.

Paul believes that "if Hamas renounced their commitment to violence, accepted Israel’s right to exist and agreed to a deal like the one offered to Arafat at Camp David, then Israel would do... most of those things" (leave occupied territories, pull down the wall etc). In other words, if Hamas surrendered what they are fighting for, and gave up completely, then Israel would reward them. This would continue the time-honoured tradition of dispute resolution by brutal military operations, getting agreement by force, which means continuing the death, maiming, destruction, lingering hatred, which is what I am trying to eliminate, or at least reduce.

I doubt Paul really believes that. There is clear evidence that the settlers will not move from their homes, though they have been built illegally.
tobe continued ...