Is Nasrallah a terrorist? Watch

Poll: Is Sheikh Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, a terrorist?
Yes, and I'm Christian, and center-left to left politically. (6)
4.55%
Yes, and I'm Christian, and center-right to right politically. (11)
8.33%
Yes, and I'm Muslim, and center-left to left politically. (0)
0%
Yes, and I'm Muslim, and center-right to right politically. (5)
3.79%
Yes, and I'm agnostic/atheist, and center-left to left politically. (20)
15.15%
Yes, and I'm agnostic/atheist, and center-right to right politically. (23)
17.42%
Yes, and I'm Jewish, and center-left to left politically. (5)
3.79%
Yes, and I'm Jewish, and center-right to right politically. (7)
5.3%
No, and I'm Christian, and center-left to left politically. (4)
3.03%
No, and I'm Christian, and center-right to right politically. (3)
2.27%
No, and I'm Muslim, and center-left to left politically. (11)
8.33%
No, and I'm Muslim, and center-right to right politically. (16)
12.12%
No, and I'm agnostic/atheist, and center-left to left politically. (12)
9.09%
No, and I'm agnostic/atheist, and center-right to right politically. (4)
3.03%
No, and I'm Jewish, and center-left to left politically. (1)
0.76%
No, and I'm Jewish, and center-right to right politically. (4)
3.03%
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#441
Report 12 years ago
#441
(Original post by Howard)
Haha! "Technically illegal" What's that supposed to mean?
That is supposed to mean - it may not have been subject to all the established checks, but with good reason for that.
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#442
Report 12 years ago
#442
(Original post by Howard)
So the press should be curtailed from informing the public of the illegal activities of their government. Are you serious?
1. The press did not know whether the NSA scheme was legal or not - it's still an issue of some debate surrounding the FISA Court and whether it can circumvented if needs be. When the details were published, the scheme was not known to be illegal.
2. The Treasury money tracking scheme was definitely NOT ILLEGAL - there's no debate on that - and yet you support the public being told?
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#443
Report 12 years ago
#443
(Original post by Howard)
"Time of war" my smelly bottom Jonathan. This sounds like a plot from 1984 - any clown government can redefine "war" as to encompass just about anything to justify their liberty-curtailing schemes. Who are we fighting this week, Oceania or Eastasia?
I guess trying to convince those with their heads wilfully in the sand that we are engaged in an asymmetrical war against terrorism is a thankless task. Frankly, I and many others, see the last 5 years as a war - not a traditional war, but a new type of war that is not always fought on battlefields and with guns, though that is a feature. And that is being severely undermined by the fact that so many in the West seem to not want to know and to deny what's happening around them.
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#444
Report 12 years ago
#444
(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
I admit, "thousands" was not correct, according to this source. But certainly much more than two are captured in Israeli prisons.
Well, there's more than 2 - Israel has criminals like any other country. But we are discussing Lebanese prisoners, of which you calimed there were "thousands" and I have demonstrated there are 3 or 4. At least 2 of which have been convicted of very serious crimes.

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
Let me tell you something jonny, before you accuse people of lying clear up your ignorance first.
I just forced you to admit that the "thousands" of prisoners you constantly claimed existed actually amounted to only THREE or FOUR. And now you're going to lecture ME on ignorance? This should be amusing...

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
According to George Galloway was that thousands were captured.
AHAHAHAHAH! That was your source?! George Galloway?! Need I say more. Clearly George Galloway was lying - because you have now admitted that what he said was VASTLY false.

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
Anyway see this too:
Source

Oh yeah I forget, the source is Arab Media Watch. Typically you will accuse it of being biased or some other non-sense :rolleyes:
Er, that site just confirms MY line that Israel holds only 3 or 4 Lebanese prisoners, not the "thousands" that you and other liars, like Galloway, claim.

Sorry, you claimed you were going to tackle my ignorance - then you produced a site that backed up EXACTLY what I said...
0
reply
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#445
Report 12 years ago
#445
(Original post by JonathanH)
1. The press did not know whether the NSA scheme was legal or not - it's still an issue of some debate surrounding the FISA Court and whether it can circumvented if needs be. When the details were published, the scheme was not known to be illegal.
2. The Treasury money tracking scheme was definitely NOT ILLEGAL - there's no debate on that - and yet you support the public being told?
1) There would be no debate at all had the NYT not made it public knowledge would there?

2) But it's not a state secret is it? State secrets are protected by law and I'm not aware the NYT has broken any such law or is being accordingly prosecuted.
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#446
Report 12 years ago
#446
See this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...66442511220171
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#447
Report 12 years ago
#447
(Original post by JonathanH)
Well, there's more than 2 - Israel has criminals like any other country. But we are discussing Lebanese prisoners, of which you calimed there were "thousands" and I have demonstrated there are 3 or 4. At least 2 of which have been convicted of very serious crimes.


I just forced you to admit that the "thousands" of prisoners you constantly claimed existed actually amounted to only THREE or FOUR. And now you're going to lecture ME on ignorance? This should be amusing...


AHAHAHAHAH! That was your source?! George Galloway?! Need I say more. Clearly George Galloway was lying - because you have now admitted that what he said was VASTLY false.


Er, that site just confirms MY line that Israel holds only 3 or 4 Lebanese prisoners, not the "thousands" that you and other liars, like Galloway, claim.

Sorry, you claimed you were going to tackle my ignorance - then you produced a site that backed up EXACTLY what I said...
No it said 52 :confused:
And actually you argued that NO prisoners were present, you didnt argue that "thousands" is not true. You were saying that prisoners captured is a lie. But hey, you like to play around. Suddenly you decide that you said they are only 3 or 4, but you didn't before. Just right now. Anyway, my point is that there ARE prisoners captured before the two israel soldiers were captured... and exchange of prisoners was the main goal.
0
reply
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#448
Report 12 years ago
#448
(Original post by JonathanH)
I guess trying to convince those with their heads wilfully in the sand that we are engaged in an asymmetrical war against terrorism is a thankless task. Frankly, I and many others, see the last 5 years as a war - not a traditional war, but a new type of war that is not always fought on battlefields and with guns, though that is a feature. And that is being severely undermined by the fact that so many in the West seem to not want to know and to deny what's happening around them.
Oh, don't wheel that old "I blame the anti-American Democrats for terrorism" type dross out. The reason the "war on terror" is being undermined has nothing to do with people like me sitting here critisizing the raison d'etre of the "war" or the NYT publishing "secrets" The day everybody joins your ranks and blindly accepts everything they are spoon fed and stop criticizing government we'll be faced with something far worse than terrorism.
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#449
Report 12 years ago
#449
(Original post by Howard)
1) There would be no debate at all had the NYT not made it public knowledge would there?
So you think it's right for everyone to know about a scheme - damaging its effectiveness - because of the possibility that it might not be completely legal?

(Original post by Howard)
2) But it's not a state secret is it?
Yes, it was actually.

(Original post by Howard)
State secrets are protected by law
Actually, the US doesn't have an equivalent to the Official Secrets Act that we have, so no, secrets are not always protected by law. Anyway, this is not the point - the point is that you seem to be completely uncaring about the damage to national security that such media actions can have and will apparently justify such damage on the grounds of 'freedom'.
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#450
Report 12 years ago
#450
(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
No it said 52 :confused:
Only if you're illiterate or partially blind.
This is what it said:
"An incomplete list obtained by Ha'aretz from the Israeli Prison Service in March 1997 suggested that Israel held 52 Lebanese"

i.e. That number is from almost 10 years ago.

Now scroll down further to where it talks about the 3 or 4 that Israel currently holds, following a prisoner swap in 2004.

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
And actually you argued that NO prisoners were present
Another lie. Here's a tip - In future, don't lie, because I will catch you again as I have done here. I have not argued that "no" prisoners were present. In fact, here is a short list of comments of mine on the topic of Lebanese prisoners from previous posts I've made on this forum, complete with the dates I made the comment and links:

28th August - "Even Lebanese sources can point to no more than 4 Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails."
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...rs#post5837791

22nd August - "There are not thousands of Lebanese prisoners in Israeli custody. The figure is 3/4... "
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...rs#post5754617

21st August - "Israel holds 3-4 prisoners - and they are convicted of things such as murder and espionage."
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...rs#post5753158

20th August - "The Lebanese government puts the figure at FOUR..."
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...rs#post5735900

10th August - "Even Lebanese officials put the number at FOUR..."
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...rs#post5622854

So, basically, I've caught you in YET ANOTHER lie, this time you were falsely claiming that I have said there were "no prisoners" when I have clearly said, many times, that there were 3 or 4 - and I have proved it. Caught, red-handed.

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
you didnt argue that "thousands" is not true.
Yes, I did, consistently. See the links above.
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#451
Report 12 years ago
#451
(Original post by Howard)
Oh, don't wheel that old "I blame the anti-American Democrats for terrorism" type dross out.
Er... When was I doing that?

(Original post by Howard)
The reason the "war on terror" is being undermined has nothing to do with people like me sitting here critisizing the raison d'etre of the "war" or the NYT publishing "secrets"
... You don't think having secrets published or having many Westerners simply unwilling to believe there is even a war undermines the war, somewhat?

(Original post by Howard)
The day everybody joins your ranks and blindly accepts everything they are spoon fed and stop criticizing government we'll be faced with something far worse than terrorism.
I'm not blindly accepting of what I am told - I read a hell of a lot on the topic - I know all the arguments for and against just about everything. And I choose to believe what I do.
0
reply
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#452
Report 12 years ago
#452
(Original post by JonathanH)
So you think it's right for everyone to know about a scheme - damaging its effectiveness - because of the possibility that it might not be completely legal?
I think freedom of the press to keep the public informed when it comes to the misdeeds of government is a duty, not to mentiona right that is entrenched in the Constitution. It is simply not acceptable for government to say "Look - we're cheating a bit here but "mums the word" - don't say anything because its really for your own good" and expect any newspaper worth its salt to buy into that.

And what's more than that - this isn't just about the scheme itself but is also about politicians being very evasive with the truth and even telling out and out lies. Bush was asked if these taps were being used on US citizens and he denied it. Should the NYT also be bound from revealing lies and half truths told by the elected to the electorate? I suppose your answer to this is also a resounding "YES" since we are, after all, at "war"
0
reply
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#453
Report 12 years ago
#453
(Original post by JonathanH)
Yes, it was actually.
Then why no prosecutions?
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#454
Report 12 years ago
#454
(Original post by Howard)
I think freedom of the press to keep the public informed when it comes to the misdeeds of government is a duty, not to mentiona right that is entrenched in the Constitution.
How exactly was the Treasury's terror funds monitoring a 'misdeed'?! What you're doing here is trying to excuse the media revealing secret government programs by smearing them ALL as 'misdeeds' even when they were indisputably legal, such as the treasury scheme, or disputed, such as the NSA wiretapping.

(Original post by Howard)
And what's more than that - this isn't just about the scheme itself but is also about politicians being very evasive with the truth and even telling out and out lies. Bush was asked if these taps were being used on US citizens and he denied it.
Whereas clearly he should have just given out all the details of highly sensitive government security schemes to all and sundry, justbecause he's asked, right? So, what - is your idea that the government cannot deny things IF THEY'RE ASKED about them? What sense does that make? How would government's ever keep security secrets if they were obliged to spill the beans whenever someone inquired?

(Original post by Howard)
Should the NYT also be bound from revealing lies and half truths told by the elected to the electorate?
They should be bound from revealing national security secrets to all and sundry for no apparent reason other than to damage the government, yes. ESPECIALLY, when the schemes are entirely legal. Their revelation of the treasury scheme was inexcusable - and I notice you are trying your utmost to ignore that issue.
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#455
Report 12 years ago
#455
Well you know what JonathanH, you beat me there. But I am not going to believe that Goerge Galloway is a liar. Ok what about the Palestenian prisoners? What about Shebaa farms? And don't you think just like Israel objected to the capture of 2 soldiers, Hezbullah would object to the capture of some of its members? If you're going to say that they are prisoned for crimes, well so are cold-blooded Israeli soldiers who have almost broke the record in war crimes.
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#456
Report 12 years ago
#456
(Original post by Howard)
Then why no prosecutions?
Number of reasons. 1 - There are plenty of those, like you, who do not value national security and would be further outraged by prosecutions. 2 - Any public court case surrounding national security issues would potentially lead to more revelations and even worse compromising of such schemes - something the government would be keen to avoid. Damage has been done already, but turning it in to a media circus and having even more revelations would make things even worse.
0
reply
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#457
Report 12 years ago
#457
(Original post by JonathanH)
Whereas clearly he should have just given out all the details of highly sensitive government security schemes to all and sundry, justbecause he's asked, right? So, what - is your idea that the government cannot deny things IF THEY'RE ASKED about them? What sense does that make? How would government's ever keep security secrets if they were obliged to spill the beans whenever someone inquired?
So, it did'nt occur to him to say "That is classified information and I cannot comment on it"
0
reply
Longshoredrift80
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#458
Report 12 years ago
#458
(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
But I am not going to believe that Goerge Galloway is a liar.
Even though he was your source for statements that I have proven to be false?

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
Ok what about the Palestenian prisoners?
Irrelevant to Lebanon.

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
What about Shebaa farms?
What about them? It's Syrian territory - no business of Lebanon.

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
Hezbullah would object to the capture of some of its members?
Indeed it would 'object' - but these are convicted criminals, convicted by the judicial system of a State. it is utterly illegal to commit further crimes in order to get them released. You don't seem to be able to see the difference between a State, with rights to arrest criminals and imprison them, and an illegitimate terrorist organisation with none of the same rights.

(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
If you're going to say that they are prisoned for crimes, well so are cold-blooded Israeli soldiers who have almost broke the record in war crimes.
... What a load of pap. You don't understand law at all, do you? It is utterly and indisputably illegal for a non-State party like Hezbollah to randomly capture foreign soldiers. There are no two ways about it. If you justify Hezbollah carrying out such actions, then what's to stop me carrying out any actions I see fit and claiming that the other person might have committed a crime therefore I can personally kill/kidnap them because I think they're guilty. In fact, what you are advocating is the absolute breakdown of law and order and basically, vigilante mob justice for all.
0
reply
danielf90
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#459
Report 12 years ago
#459
(Original post by o0MorseyMan0o)
Well you know what JonathanH, you beat me there. But I am not going to believe that Goerge Galloway is a liar. Ok what about the Palestenian prisoners? What about Shebaa farms? And don't you think just like Israel objected to the capture of 2 soldiers, Hezbullah would object to the capture of some of its members? If you're going to say that they are prisoned for crimes, well so are cold-blooded Israeli soldiers who have almost broke the record in war crimes.
What about the palestinian prisoners? They regularly see Red Cross representatives and get treated fairlyin prison. UNLIKE those prisoners taken by the palestinians, who arenever seen of or heard of again!

What about the Shebaa farms? It's Syrian land, taken by israel in 1967. it's NOT lebanese!

Of course israel will object to 2 israel soldiers being kidnapped! They were taken in an act of war, not during a war/conflict! What about the 8 soldiers killed during the cross border raid?

The IDF has nowhere near 'broken the record for war crimes'!
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#460
Report 12 years ago
#460
And what about the rest of prisoners in the wiki source?... surely having a dispute about their accuracy does not mean they don't exist
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (756)
80.34%
Leave (185)
19.66%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise