Wtf is going on in Israel today???????

[nintendan]

Israel's Sharon Accused
As War Criminal
by Dean Andromidas

Europe was publicly and harshly reminded on June 17, of how Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon earned the name "the Butcher of Lebanon." BBC television's "Panorama" program aired a devastating documentary, "The Accused," detailing Sharon's central role in the infamous massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon, during the 1982 Israeli-Lebanese war. The program made clear that Sharon could be brought before a international tribunal to be tried as a "Class A" war criminal.

On June 18, twenty-three Palestinian survivors of that massacre presented an investigative judge in Belgium with charges against Sharon for war crimes. Under Belgian law, which allows for plaintiffs of any nation to present such cases in a Belgian court, the judge will now open his own official investigation, which could end with a war crimes indictment of Sharon.

These events are part of a growing uproar internationally, particularly in Europe, against the policies of Sharon's government. The countries of the European Union (EU) and Russia are convinced that if Sharon is not stopped, he will force the Middle East into a war, with catastrophic consequences for the entire world. The "Panorama" program and the Belgian investigation in themselves will not stop Sharon, but they will, nonetheless, seriously hinder his hopes to win the propaganda war to convince the world that his government is only defending itself against Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat, the "terrorist."

The BBC Accuses
"Panorama" vividly recounts the bloody events of early Autumn 1982, when then-Defense Minister Sharon authorized his allies, the Lebanese Phalangist militias, to enter the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, which culminated in the slaughter of 800 men, women, and children. The United Nations put the figure at 1,500, and a later investigation by the International Red Cross put the death toll at 2,750. These victims were civilians, noncombatants in the civil war that had raged in Lebanon, or against the invading Israeli forces. Most of the victims—old men, women, and children—where not shot, but were tortured to death, the bodies mutilated in one of the worst massacres since World War II.

"Panorama" also demonstrated that Sharon has broken signed agreements, promises made to the President of the United States, and is a prolific liar—a fact that Washington policy circles should take careful note of, if they still entertain any illusions that Sharon is a "partner for peace."

The BBC account falls short in one important respect, failing to identify Sharon's intention in invading Lebanon. It was not simply to force the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) out of Lebanon, but to establish a puppet regime in Beirut and to proceed to attack Damascus, Syria; if that were not stopped, to march on Baghdad, Iraq; and, at the same time, to implement his "Jordan is Palestine policy," to push all the Palestinians of the West Bank into the Kingdom of Jordan. Despite the fact that there was a political consensus in Israel and within the Reagan Administration for such a policy, Sharon used all his powers of deceit and manipulation to implement his grand scheme. In fact, such an operational military plan had existed within Israeli military doctrine since the end of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

In recounting the events of 1982, the "Panorama" moderator, Fergal Keane, stated, "In June 1982, Israel's army stormed across an international border and invaded Lebanon. The Israelis said they wanted to protect their borders from Palestinian guerrilla attack, and Ariel Sharon's army was soon laying siege to . . . Beirut."

In September 1982, the United States brokered a cease-fire that included the Israelis, Syrians, and various Lebanese factions, aimed at ending the Israeli intervention and the civil war that had been raging in Lebanon since the 1970s. That agreement was favorable to the Israelis and led to the PLO's evacuation to Tunisia. It also led to the withdrawal of a multinational peacekeeping force, while naming Bashir Gemayel, leader of the Phalange and Israel's main ally, as President of Lebanon. The United States promised to back a program of reconstruction. In return, Israel was to begin withdrawing its forces over a 12-week period, and not to enter West Beirut, the stronghold of the Lebanese Muslim factions and the site of Sabra and Shatila.

On Sept. 14, within days of this agreement, Sharon broke Israel's promise, sending Israeli forces to occupy West Beirut. Their attack began hours before its stated pretext—the assassination of Bashir Gemayel in a bomb attack—had occurred! That same day, Israeli armored forces surrounded Sabra and Shatila. All these operations were coordinated with the Phalangists, who were "allowed" by Sharon—in Beirut at the time—to enter the Palestinian camps. The unarmed Palestinians had been the Phalangists' most bitter enemies, a fact which formed the basis for the Phalange alliance with Israel. The Phalangists, like Sharon, had as their goal the expulsion of the 500,000 Palestinian refugees from Lebanon. The next 48 hours witnessed horrible carnage.

`You Must Stop, They Are Killing Children!'
"Panorama" interviewed eyewitnesses, including Israelis, Palestinians, foreign journalists, and aid workers, on the horrors of those events. "Panorama" also interviewed senior diplomats and legal experts who had been intimately involved in the events of 1982, who gave precise testimony to the fact that Sharon can be classified as a "Class A" war criminal.

Judge Richard Goldstone, former Chief Prosecutor for the United Nations War Crime Tribunals (1994-96), gave "Panorama" a precise definition of the war crime Sharon stands accused of: "A military commander and a political leader who was involved in giving instructions would clearly have an obligation under the law of war, and under the Geneva Convention, to ensure that innocent civilians were not murdered or raped or injured in any way. Command responsibility goes fairly far. It requires, obviously, knowledge of the danger to innocent civilians; if there's that knowledge, then there's an obligation to take reasonable steps to protect them."[FIGURE 51]

When Israel occupied West Beirut, it became responsible for the safety of all civilians, as Goldstone defined it. But in 1982, the Israeli government hid behind the legalistic fraud that Israel was not responsible for killings by the Phalange. Sharon claimed, "Not for a moment did we imagine that they would do what they did." But "Panorama" interviewed Morris Draper, who, in 1982, was President Ronald Reagan's special envoy for the Lebanese war, asking him to comment on Sharon's "innocence through ignorance." He replied: "Complete and utter nonsense. . . . You'd have to be appallingly ignorant. I mean, I suppose if you came down from the Moon that day you might not have predicted it." When asked whether he had any doubts of Sharon's responsibility, Draper said, "No doubt whatsoever."

Draper was the author of the cease-fire agreement, and had promised the safety of the Palestinians. "Panaroma" quotes his message to Sharon when the first reports of the massacres reached him: "You must stop the acts of slaughter, they are horrifying. I have a representative in the camp counting the bodies. You should be ashamed. The situation is absolutely appalling. They're killing children! You have the field completely under your control and are therefore responsible for that area."

Richard Falk, Professor of International Law at Princeton University and a member of the United Nations commission that investigated the events, told "Panorama": "Sharon's specific command responsibility arises from the fact that he was minister of defense in touch with the field commanders, that he actually was present there in Beirut, that he met with the Phalange leadership, and it was he that gave the directions and order that resulted in the Phalange entering the camps in September. . . . There is no question in my mind that he is indictable for the kind of knowledge that he either had or should have had."

Sharon's defenders, including his spokesman Ranaan Gissen, use the report of the Kahane Commission, which was established by the Israeli government to investigate the massacre. The commission found that there was "no conspiracy" by the Israelis to perpetrate the massacre. Nonetheless, the commission found that Sharon "disregarded the danger of acts of vengeance and bloodshed by the Phalangists against the population of the refugee camps. He failed to take this danger into account when he decided to have the Phalangists enter the camps." He failed to order "appropriate measures for preventing or reducing the danger of massacre as a condition for the Phalangist entry into the camps."

Even this, under international law, is grounds for a war crimes indictment. Judge Goldstone, commenting on the Kahane Commission report, said, "Well, clearly, justice requires that criminals should be brought to book, and if people, regardless of who they are, are shown by an investigation to have been in breach of the law, then clearly criminal prosecution should follow; and in the case of Sabra and Shatila, clearly the Kahane Commission found that very serious crimes had been committed, and I have no doubt any decent person would regret the fact that not a single criminal prosecution followed."

In 1982, the affair led to the removal of Sharon as defense minister and a ruling that he was unfit to ever hold that post. That has not barred him from becoming prime minister.

The massacre led to the collapse of the cease-fire and the total discrediting of American Middle East policy. U.S. troops and citizens became open targets for terrorist attacks. Lebanon's civil war lasted another seven bloody years.

Will Sharon Be Thrown in the Dock?
The case filed against Sharon in a Belgian court promises to be every bit as dramatic as "The Accused," but unlike the "Panorama" moderator, the Belgian judge will have the powers of the state supporting him. He has the power, in the form of subpoenas and indictments, to conduct interviews and interrogations. Although it is unlikely that Sharon will end up in a Belgian dock, this case promises to keep the Israeli Foreign Ministry and Sharon's spin-doctors very busy.

The Belgian government, particularly its Foreign Minister, Louis Marcel, has been very critical of Sharon's government, and supports fully the recommendations of the Mitchell Commission report, particularly its call for a freeze on Jewish settlements. Belgium will soon take on the EU presidency, from which position it will be able to make these concerns known. As the case proceeds, it will be followed closely throughout Europe.

Because Belgium has incorporated the Geneva Convention within its legal system, the 23 Palestinian survivors were able to present their case before its courts. They were represented by three lawyers, Luc Walleyn and Michael Verhaeghe of Belgium and Chibi Mallat of Lebanon, who told Reuters on June 18, "We hope that Mr. Sharon will be brought to justice, will be tried, and will defend himself."

Both Walleyn and Verhaeghe are highly professional human rights lawyers. Walleyn is a member of Avocats Sans Frontières, and has prosecuted Belgian soldiers accused of human rights violations while serving as UN peacekeepers in Somalia; but, he has also handled the legal defense of a high Rwandan official accused of participating in the Rwanda genocide. Verhaeghe represented the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions in their case against former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.

Walleyn told EIR he is confident that Judge Collignon, the investigative judge, will pursue a vigorous inquiry. The judge will no doubt receive assistance from other states such as Denmark or France, thus broadening his reach. The case can, and hopefully will, constrain Sharon's freedom of action in carrying out a Bush-backed war policy.

[mug222]

Well, Slaney, we're waiting...

[ladywithspinninghead]

Originally posted by S|aney:
IT IS A FACT that Arafat is a terrorist.
IT IS A FACT that Sharon is a war hero.

But instead, it sounds like you already had your mind made up!

No hard feelings! Happy Easter to you too!

[This message has been edited by S|aney (edited 03-30-2002).]

haha, nice one...very selective of what I write and then twist it around! nice touch bud!

Anyhow, I think you'll find that throughout here I wanted to know about Arafat's ties to the terrorists, to what extent if so, and finally, his measure of influence amongst them. Sorry if I need to spell everything out!

[ladywithspinninghead]

Originally posted by Matthew_Page2000:
ladywithspinninghead,

Thank you for pointing out my Syria/Lebanon blunder.
It's nice that you've travelled the world a bit, but truly unfortunate that you spent the duration of your travels with an enormous boulder on your head.

MAP

Er, Matthew? What's your problem?

Seriously bud...why don't you shed some light on the issue instead of making this personal? Why do you feel you have to resort to personal attacks?

I am WELL aware of Arafat's past - I know damned well that the PLO was responsible for most of the atrocities committed before the early 90's. But that does not necessarily mean that Arafat has a direct hand in what is occurring today - to what degree is his influence?!? Who knows - maybe you and I have two different takes on what constitutes a terrorist - perhaps you subscribe to the prevailing view amongst the Israeli troops that stone-throwing kids pose a threat.
If so, then I'm afraid, we should have cleared up the semantics issue in the beginning. I want to know what exactly Arafat's ties are to Hamas. You have not given me anything to substantiate this except insults.

I may have a boulder on my head but at least I wasn't born with a chip on my shoulder...

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by mug222:
No, the feelings you've expressed here go far beyond the boundaries of political correctness; they cross the line of human decency. It is one thing to hate Mr. Arafat--it is quite another to hate the Palistinian people (a hatred that you may deny, but which is clear in your posts.)
p.s. The "vain"? A humorous misspelling, when one considers the source.

mug, what in the world are you talking about? I saw no post which makes me even consider as a possibility that Lemonite "hates" Palestinians.
You're a fine one to preach about hatred, after what you said about Lemonite in an earlier thread.

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by ladywithspinninghead:

Sheesh people, that was the whole intention of this thread for crying out loud!!!!!!!!!
I wanted to know - I wanted people to fill me in....I wanted to be enlightened - not bloody insulted, okay?
I've been scouring other sources - this was one of many - remind me to never do it again -
Happy Easter to you too...

I don't usually agree with ladywithspinninghead, and am offended by her tendancy to use God's name irreverantly (in fact, I find that much more offensive than Lemonite saying Palestinians have no COMMERCIAL value). However, she has a point here. She did in fact type on the first post "Now, someone correct me if I'm wrong.....that's why I'm posting this - ". She was venting on that first post, but i really think she was inviting other's opinions. I think that the insults thrown her way (no insults were thrown by Lemonite, might I add) in this thread are really uncalled for. She and I disagree on this issue, and I believe she is wrong, but that doesn't mean that either one of us is stupid.

[80sU2isBest]

Also, a lot of you are in such uproar over Lemonite's post in which he said that the Palestinians have no COMMERCIAL value. However, look at that again. Not once in that post does Lemonite talk about their HUMAN VALUE. I think that is a distinction that needs to be drawn. Think about it please, and while you may still find that you don't agree with his assessment of their production value, you will admit he was not talking about their worth as human beings.

[Vorsprung]

The Middle East... I sometimes wonder if ther will ever be peace there. Israel has occupied the Westbank and Gaza strip for the past 35 years now and will do so as long as there will be resistance/terror from Palestinians, but as long as Israel occupies the Palestinians and also use terror against them the Palestinians won't stop.....a deadlock situation.
Now you can blame Palestinians for using terror, which is wrong, but do they have other means???? Remember, they are the ones being occupied, and not just occupied, Israel is also stealing land from them by making these colonies on the Westbank based on some religious right they believe to have.

Perhaps the only solution is a rather sad one: Jahweh or Allah gets really pissed off and throws some giant meteor on Jerusalem which would wipe away entire Israel and Palestina, 'cause the fighting there will continue for quite a while. The other solution would be that Cupid came along with a couple of million arrows....



------------------
Vorsprung durch Technik

[mug222]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
Also, a lot of you are in such uproar over Lemonite's post in which he said that the Palestinians have no COMMERCIAL value. However, look at that again. Not once in that post does Lemonite talk about their HUMAN VALUE. I think that is a distinction that needs to be drawn. Think about it please, and while you may still find that you don't agree with his assessment of their production value, you will admit he was not talking about their worth as human beings.

[quote]Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:

Originally posted by mug222:
mug, what in the world are you talking about? I saw no post which makes me even consider as a possibility that Lemonite "hates" Palestinians.
You're a fine one to preach about hatred, after what you said about Lemonite in an earlier thread.

What in the world are you talking about? Two points which I thought would be clear to anyone:

1) Lemonite said that the Palistinians are "just there." Please, if this is not a remark about their "worth as human beings," as you say, than explain to me what it is. I think we both know that it goes beyond their commercial value or whatever crap you are trying to feed us.

2) I have nothing against hatred--I respect that Lemonite hates Arafat, just as I hate Arafat, Sharon, and Lemonite. These are judgements based on a certain knowledge of the recipient of the hatred, founded in good judgement, and acceptable by my view. What is NOT acceptable is to belittle an entire race of people (and I would say "to hate them as well," but Lemonite is adamant that this is not the case.) I can debate politics like the rest of you, discussing the right of Israeli's to the Western Settlements (zilch..oh, no, wait, God told them to build a farm right there, right where it will annoy the Palistinians the most) or the proposed boundaries to a Palistinian state. But it's simply impossible to have a rational discussion about these ideas when Lemonite obstinately continues to refer to "people like" the Palistinians (a term I detest, and which I hear far too often), and to paint their populace in paint strokes altogether too broad.



[This message has been edited by mug222 (edited 03-31-2002).]

[lady lemonade]

Originally posted by Vorsprung:
The Middle East... I sometimes wonder if ther will ever be peace there. Israel has occupied the Westbank and Gaza strip for the past 35 years now and will do so as long as there will be resistance/terror from Palestinians, but as long as Israel occupies the Palestinians and also use terror against them the Palestinians won't stop.....a deadlock situation.
Now you can blame Palestinians for using terror, which is wrong, but do they have other means???? Remember, they are the ones being occupied, and not just occupied, Israel is also stealing land from them by making these colonies on the Westbank based on some religious right they believe to have.

Perhaps the only solution is a rather sad one: Jahweh or Allah gets really pissed off and throws some giant meteor on Jerusalem which would wipe away entire Israel and Palestina, 'cause the fighting there will continue for quite a while. The other solution would be that Cupid came along with a couple of million arrows....

Hey good idea, why don't we finish off Hitler's work and wipe off another couple million Jews off the face of the Earth. I'm sorry but I thought that remark was distatesful and offending

And about the religious rights you were talking about, I agree that colonization by Jewish settlers is wrong and constitutes provocation. But you fail to address the terrorists's claims that it's their religious duty to wipe off all infidels from holy arab land. They do not want peace and that's why they pursue terror whenever the two nations are coming close to an agreement or a ceasefire. As long as there are extremists groups there will never be peace. Hence the need for a Palestinian leadership that will cooperate with Isreal instead of sending mixed messages...

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Originally posted by lady lemonade:
Hence the need for a Palestinian leadership that will cooperate with Isreal instead of sending mixed messages...

True, but right now I don't think Ariel Sharon is showing a great willingness to cooperate with the Palestinian people, regardless of who is their leader.

[lady lemonade]

Originally posted by FizzingWhizzbees:
True, but right now I don't think Ariel Sharon is showing a great willingness to cooperate with the Palestinian people, regardless of who is their leader.

I agree but the difference is that Sharon has only been PM for a couple of months while Arafat has been the leader of the Palestinians for more than a decade. He had some good partners for peace in Rabbin and Barrach but Arafat is not willing to make the sacrifices that will put him at odds with some extremists groups...

[Lemonite]

Originally posted by mug222:
1) Lemonite said that the Palistinians are "just there." Please, if this is not a remark about their "worth as human beings," as you say, than explain to me what it is. I think we both know that it goes beyond their commercial value or whatever crap you are trying to feed us.

2) I have nothing against hatred--I respect that Lemonite hates Arafat, just as I hate Arafat, Sharon, and Lemonite. These are judgements based on a certain knowledge of the recipient of the hatred, founded in good judgement, and acceptable by my view. What is NOT acceptable is to belittle an entire race of people (and I would say "to hate them as well," but Lemonite is adamant that this is not the case.) I can debate politics like the rest of you, discussing the right of Israeli's to the Western Settlements (zilch..oh, no, wait, God told them to build a farm right there, right where it will annoy the Palistinians the most) or the proposed boundaries to a Palistinian state. But it's simply impossible to have a rational discussion about these ideas when Lemonite obstinately continues to refer to "people like" the Palistinians (a term I detest, and which I hear far too often), and to paint their populace in paint strokes altogether too broad.

Again, I will say it that No where was I referring to Palestinians as 'Dirt'. This was a manufactured ruse that was right from the start misguided.. As I have stated many times.. I'm not sitting here lying about this.. Why would I have any inclination to 'lie' about it.., I just want my point understood in the medium it was given. What I am Saying (For what is now at least the 10th Time) is that this "Collective gathering of People known as the Palestinians" AS AN ECONOMIC UNIT are a 'Doldrum' of Exporting/Producing Activity... Now AM I WRONG?.. Do they have a Flourishing Farming Industry.. or a Productive Internet Technology Company Out There?.. I Wrote earlier in this thread.. But Surprise Surprise, I will have to repeat it now.. If That statement is wrong, Then I will go back on it... That was all.. I was just putting it out there, like I wrote above as Food For Thought.. To keep in mind wherever it may ever apply.

NoWhere was I ever talking about 'Human Value'.. Please stop the Delusions just because you don't Like me.. It's unproductive.

With Respect To your Comments on 'Hatred'.
Again, You are putting words in my mouth by saying 'You Respect that Lemonite Hates Arafat', when just a few posts above I stated my position on this.. That I did not hate 'Arafat'. I even went so far to state that I didn't hate 'Liberals' (Including you Mug.. But Like I wrote above, I will disagree with the Liberal beliefs til the End of the Planet.. But It never leaves me 'HATING' the Soul of the Liberal.. Just disagreeing with the Beliefs.. IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?)... Just dismissing anything I write as 'Oh That's Not What You Truly Believe Now Lemonite'.. Is just ridiculous, because Again, I'm not here Lying to the Forum.. That gets us no where and I end up spending post after post writing the same thing because People fail to read my words.. Or maybe it's just a personal Ignoring of my words..

Lady and I were having a civilized discussion.. You just refuse to even try and have one with me because you do not like me.. Fair Enough.. Take your Ideals elsewhere if you are looking for some Discussion.. There are many people here that will indulge you.

L. Unplugged

[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 03-31-2002).]

[Rono]

..

[S|aney]

Originally posted by mug222:
Well, Slaney, we're waiting...

Aren't you the mature one. I find it fascinating that you have contributed absolutely nothing to this thread, other than personal attacks. "Well, Slaney, we're waiting..." Are you trying to win a contest or something? Most of us here are trying to engage in conversation and learn a thing or two. What's your goal? Did the kids in high school pick on you? and maybe now you feel the need to take it out on us or something? Sounds like if someone disagrees with you, they somehow become your incompetent enemy. Instead of bashing Lemonite and myself, you could focus that energy on actually learning something.

As far I'm concerned FizzingWhizzbees and nintendan presented a very legitimate case. Their intent was to point out their opinion, not to personally attack me because they disagree. I will respond to them separately, but I can't just dig up one article or explain my counter-arguement in two sentences.

You have to understand, I have studied this conflict very, very closely my entire life. It is a very detailed and complicated issue that must be explained precisely and carefully. I do find it interesting that the only thing people want to challenge me on is the last sentence in my reply.

FizzingWhizzbees and nintendan! Thank you for the maturity. Even though I disagree, I completely understand why you hold that opinion. It's not a cut and dry case. There is a lot of history behind it. Believe me, I'm not trying to justify the horrific acts that took place in those refugee camps in '82, but there are two sides to the issue.

[S|aney]

Originally posted by ladywithspinninghead:

haha, nice one...very selective of what I write and then twist it around! nice touch bud!

Anyhow, I think you'll find that throughout here I wanted to know about Arafat's ties to the terrorists, to what extent if so, and finally, his measure of influence amongst them. Sorry if I need to spell everything out!

Sorry! I'm not trying to offend you, but it did sound like you came in here with your mind already made up. I'm not trying to twist your words, but you do need to be careful with calling Sharon a "bastard" and making Arafat look somewhat innocent. As you already know, this is a very sensitive subject and we must be very careful with it. I do respect the fact that you are willing to admit that you want to learn more about this issue. I hope in some way that I can help.

HAVE AN AWESOME EASTER!!!

[mug222]

Hmm...riled up a bit there, Slaney? In fact I've written on the conflicts of 1982 and I was just glad that Fizzing and nintendan so astutely raised the point before I could even see your post claiming so erroneously that "he has not committed any crimes or warcrimes that you can clearly and distinctly point out." Laughable!

Calm down--wouldn't want you to have a coronary on Easter.

EDIT: I've added a smiley face so you don't have to go off again. Like so many FYM threads, no views will be changed here so I'll make my exit before this thread begins to resemble Arafat's compound.

You get so angry about an innocuous phrase ("we're waiting") and then viciously attack me (nope, not teased in high school, thanks). So silly you are! My point is not to anger, but to confront the one sided view of so many of our fair nation. You're such a nut

[This message has been edited by mug222 (edited 03-31-2002).]

[S|aney]

Originally posted by mug222:


Calm down--wouldn't want you to have a coronary on Easter.

EDIT: I've added a smiley face so you don't have to go off again. Like so many FYM threads, no views will be changed here so I'll make my exit before this thread begins to resemble Arafat's compound.


[This message has been edited by mug222 (edited 03-31-2002).]

Fling personal attacks around, offer no solid opinion, take one last jab, then take the easy way out when challenged... good form

[S|aney]

Originally posted by mug222:
Hmm...riled up a bit there, Slaney? In fact I've written on the conflicts of 1982 and I was just glad that Fizzing and nintendan so astutely raised the point before I could even see your post claiming so erroneously that "he has not committed any crimes or warcrimes that you can clearly and distinctly point out." Laughable!

Calm down--wouldn't want you to have a coronary on Easter.

EDIT: I've added a smiley face so you don't have to go off again. Like so many FYM threads, no views will be changed here so I'll make my exit before this thread begins to resemble Arafat's compound.

You get so angry about an innocuous phrase ("we're waiting") and then viciously attack me (nope, not teased in high school, thanks). So silly you are! My point is not to anger, but to confront the one sided view of so many of our fair nation. You're such a nut

[This message has been edited by mug222 (edited 03-31-2002).]

Ho many times are you going to edit????

[mug222]

Originally posted by S|aney:
Fling personal attacks around, offer no solid opinion, take one last jab, then take the easy way out when challenged... good form

Did you offer any facts? Everything I wanted to say was presented rather definitively in nintendan's article, which I suggest you read again.