If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Bill Maher: "I consider myself a true patriot. I want my country to be better and look at itself."   (cnn.com) divider line 373
    More: Misc  
•       •       •

4008 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Dec 2002 at 8:44 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



373 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-12-05 10:50:02 AM
Vote for the puppet on the left or the puppet on the right?
Let's get some third party blood in Washington now!In the meantime, Bush is still the biggest moron of them all. Maher is a hero. Maher believes in the true meaning of America.

Decriminalize. Don't. Legalize.
 
2002-12-05 10:50:51 AM
Actually, Metallicat is the idiot.
 
2002-12-05 10:52:00 AM
-Cromar-

"And no the PLO charter has not been altered. Arafat signed the declaration for Israel's right to exist but clearly does not believe in that at all; it was just a political move."

The PLO charter has definitely been altered to strike or delete those articles that were contrary to the decisions made at the 1993 Washington Declaration of Principles.

Here is an Israeli site showing the charter, and the articles that became invalid: http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00pv0

Notice that Article 33 states:

"This Charter shall not be amended save by [vote of] a majority of two-thirds of the total membership of the National Congress of the Palestine Liberation Organization [taken] at a special session convened for that purpose."

The Principles that produced the agreement to alter the Charter were hosted and brokered by Clinton. Arafat considered that this agreement changed the Charter explicitly, but then Prime Minister Rabbin did not find the agreement, even though it was internationally considered legally binding, to be good enough. No less than three times, with different reasons each time, did Rabbin/Netanyahu/Perez/Sharon refuse to accept that the agreement was legally binding on the PLO.

1. Refused to recognise the mutual recognition letters sent between the PLO and Israel in 1993. The Arafat/PLO made these statements in that letter:

"In the mutual recognition letters between myself and the late Prime Minister Itzhaq Rabbin of September 9/10, 1993, the PLO committed to recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security, to accept UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two ides. The PLO also agreed to secure the necessary changes in the Palestinian Covenant to reflect these commitments."

2. Refused to accept the letter sent by Arafat to Peres in May 1996 specifically stating a PLO vote was held and the Charter was changed.

Find that letter here (a very strong statement for peace):

http://www.efreedomnews.com/News%20Archive/Israel%20Palestine/PLO%20Charter%20 Amended%201996.htm

Note the part where it says:

"And based on the introduction of the Declaration of Principles signed in Washington D.C. on 13 September 1993, which included the agreement of both sides to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict and to live in peaceful coexistence, mutual dignity and security, while recognizing their mutual legitimate and political right"

and:

"The Palestinian National Charter is hereby amended by canceling the articles that are contrary to the letters exchanged between the P.L.O. and the Government of Israel 9-10 September 1993."

2. Refused to accept the Jan. 1998 letter sent to President Clinton specifically listing the clauses that were invalidated. Fine that text here:

http://www.palestineaffairscouncil.org/documents/charter_amendment.htm

It states:

"We would like to put to rest these concerns. The Palestine National Council's resolution, in accordance with Article 33 of the Covenant, is a comprehensive amendment of the Covenant. All of the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the P.L.O. commitment to recognize and live in peace side by side with Israel are no longer in effect.

As a result, Articles 6-10,15, 19-23, and 30 have been nullified, and the parts in Articles 1-5, 11-14, 16-l8, 25-27 and 29 that are in consistent with the above mentioned commitments have also been nullified."

3. Insisted yet again on a vote and another letter.

Arafat by this time must have been way over the manouevering, yet when Clinton asked in the interest of peace for Arafat and the PLO to explicitly state that the Charter had been amended by a vote, he convened the PLO council again and they voted.

In December of 1998 a Special meeting of Palestine Central Council voted by 81 to 7 to reaffirm changes in the PLO's charter which deny Israel's right to exist. This meets the two thirds membership criteria and was finally accepted even by Netanyahu/Perez as altering the Charter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/232806.stm

Take note of the resistance of the PLO to another vote and how Arafat had to force them to do it. This is part of the reason the problem was thrown back into the negotiations so many times, to humiliate the PLO and to weaken Arafats position with them in not refusing to play their games. It meant that Israel could say they wouldn't bargain until this problem was laid to rest, drawing out negotiations for 6 years. It also weakened Clinton, showing that Israel did not accept the word of the USA either.

From that article:

"The Palestinians said the time for voting was over and pointed out that the Wye memorandum says only that PNC members should reaffirm their support for moves already taken.

But Israel's Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, said he would not carry out another troop withdrawal from the West Bank if the PNC meeting passed without a vote.

The Americans are embarrassed - as long ago as April 1996 President Clinton announced that the PNC had already honoured its commitment to amend the charter. "

I hope this lays that one to rest.
 
2002-12-05 10:58:12 AM
Sorry to those not interested in the PLO/Arafat thing, and sorry about my crappy spelling. It's 2am, but I can't spell at the best of times.
 
2002-12-05 11:07:48 AM
I would like to draw -Cromars- attention to the following two articles of the -original- PLO charter that specifically state ONLY those Arabs living in Palestine before 1947 were able to be considered Palestinians, removing any opening for other arabs to legitimately come to help and expect land in reward if the PLO won.

Article 5: "The Palestinians are those Arab nationals who, until 1947, normally resided in Palestine regardless of whether they were evicted from it or have stayed there. Anyone born, after that date, of a Palestinian father - whether inside Palestine or outside it - is also a Palestinian."

The next one plainly and clearly states that any Jews that were in Palestine in 1947 are also considered Palestinian, and the PLO not only recognises their right to live there but is actually fighting for their liberation from the 'invaders'.

Article 6: The Jews who had normally resided in Palestine until the beginning of the Zionist invasion will be considered Palestinians.

All your speeches about the PLO hating all Jews is looking pretty much like hate speech to me now. I admit, I didn't know about this one either, but I also wasn't the one making false and inflammatory statements about them.
 
2002-12-05 11:52:09 AM
I like how the first 20 or so comments are always the most intelligent and succinct. It's odd how it works that way. At about comment number 100, they become long winded and emotional, and by 200 there is so much haphazard quoting I feel like I'm reading a dictionary.
 
2002-12-05 01:13:47 PM
Fact relayed for understanding something:

Sacrificing life for others= Brave/Hero
Sacrificing life and destroying the lives of others for compensation in after-life=Greedy/Selfish/Maniacal

IMHO.
 
2002-12-05 01:33:02 PM
-Mercury6613-

"Sacrificing life for others= Brave/Hero"

Glad we agree. The suicide-nuts did what they did because they believed that drawing attention to the undeclared war on the peoples of the middle east might bring it to a close, and save lives.

They believed they were sacrificing themselves for others, so by your definition they are heros.
 
2002-12-05 01:49:23 PM
think outside your SUV.
 
2002-12-05 02:16:46 PM
So if I believe I'm a purple vampire and the winged Frogs from Venus are coming to destroy Earth, and the only way to save the lives of the people is to overthrow and assume the presidency, I'm a hero?!

Jackass.
 
2002-12-05 02:17:55 PM
A hero is someone who saves more lives than he takes, and for a good reason. They did neither.
 
2002-12-05 03:19:09 PM
Nice try tadlette, but an ally of me you will not make. They gave their lives for two reasons; 1 to prove/make a point and 2, gain favor of their God.
I have no respect nor do I feel there is honor in the actions of such people.
 
2002-12-05 04:05:50 PM
1.) You almost got me Tadlette until I realized we're talking 1993-1996. Since then nothing has stopped, Arafat has continued to pump money into the system (his Fatah party claimed responsibility for one of the multiple bombings that's happened in recent weeks, I lose track of them all), leaving all of his words empty and meaningless.

2.) They didn't kill themselves for others, they were dreaming of the hundred virgins or whatever the arbitrary number is that the mullahs make up as they go along. I WAS right with my initial intuition that you just don't understand the mindset with which these people operate. They don't care about anything but their rewards in the afterlife. They can spend all their time violating every single last tenant of their religion as long as they redeem themselves by blowing up some jews (according to the rich mullahs that sucker them in with that promise). This is how they live their lives.
 
2002-12-05 04:11:03 PM
And BTW, "inflammatory hate speech"? When you have an organization created specifically for the purpose of genocide I think I should be allowed to throw "inflammatory hate speech at them" all day.
 
2002-12-05 04:43:31 PM
-Cromar-

1.) You almost got me Tadlette until I realized we're talking 1993-1996.

The last action in the timeline was December 1998. The withdrawal from the settlements that was promised didn't eventuate, and the initifada was declared.

There hasn't been a serious attempt at peace made since then, and you can almost certainly lay the blame for that at Sharons door. He wants the land, and withdrawing the settlers from most places will leave it all the less likely that he would be awarded it in any settlement.

Do you realise the Israeli government are crying poor to secure large cash injections for their economy from the US, but they spend over $10 million a year on funding those illegal and UN condemned settlements ?

Notice I am not applying good and evil tags here, just stating a strategy fact. I might do the same thing if I was him, Israel does not really have enough land.

If you accept that then you can't blame the PLO either. I don't think either side is going to be able to come to the party without being forced (I hate that word, unless it's in the jedi context). To imply that all the prevarication and double dealing is on the Palestinian side is to be deliberately blind.

2.) See, it is you that always blames it on the Jews :)
 
2002-12-05 04:51:47 PM
Tadlette, it's not funny :P I'm not blaming the jews for existing. Bin Laden's specific goal was to sever(e) the ties between US and Saudi Arabia but he suckered the hijackers into it with promises of jew-killing, which they were taught brings them great rewards in the afterlife. I'm sorry if you don't understand what motivates these horrible people. Again I'm not making the retarded statement that the jews are at fault for existing so stop putting that into my mouth.

It's impossible for me to take the side of any group that resorts to the tactic of complete genocide over a political/land battle. Until Sharon declares holy war on all muslims and signs a law calling for the eradication of all Arabs there's no way I can sympathize with Yasser "Blow 'em up" Arafat. Quoting Arafat isn't going to get you anywhere in this debate because I'm made clear that his words are totally meaningless.
 
2002-12-05 04:55:26 PM
-Kattalasso-

"A hero is someone who saves more lives than he takes, and for a good reason. They did neither."

There is never a good reason to do what they did, but they did think it was for the best for their people. Over a million people have did in the middle east in the last few decades, mostly in wars or governmental turmoil that was whipped up by the west.

Again, it's just a fact. That's how things were done back then. I say it's time to ensure they can never work that way again.
 
2002-12-05 05:07:37 PM
-Cromar-

You say that the PLO was created specifically to kill all Jews, but I posted a section of the PLO Charter that SPECIFICALLY states that the Jews living in Palestine in 1947 are considered to be Palestinians and they should stay and help in the fight.

Your statement and the actual document are in total conflict. If you didn't read it, you should.

"Quoting Arafat isn't going to get you anywhere in this debate because I'm made clear that his words are totally meaningless."

The quotes were from legal documents sent from the PLO to your President. That is the text of the legal documents, nice, isn't it. All written and verifiable. Links all posted next to each quote, go and check them.

And to think - I thought you'd have to at least grudgingly admit that they aren't as bad as you thought.
 
2002-12-05 05:18:38 PM
You are still quoting Arafat! Legal documents from him mean as much as they do from Hussein. "Sure guys, you can exist." *funnels millions to terrorist programs* "Sure guys, you can send in the weapons inspectors." *doesn't let them in*

Words are meaningless!
 
2002-12-05 05:47:30 PM
You want to see what happened to Arafat after he did all that work to get the Charter worked out and make peace?

Israel, like Cromar, said 'we aren't withdrawing now as we promised because we don't have to - the words weren't quite right'

Take a look at this:

"The Legal Unit of the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department issued a statement Tuesday responding to arguments recently advanced by Israel Attorney-General Elyakim Rubinstein regarding the interpretation of Resolution 242.

Rubinstein has claimed that 242 does not compel Israel to withdraw fully from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip because there was no recognized international border between Israel and the West Bank and Gaza Strip and because the resolution makes no mention of a Palestinian entity. "

So Sharon is a cheat and a liar, who is drawing out the peace process for his own ends while people on both side of the fence.

http://www.nad-plo.org/press/pna2.html

Your protestations are meaningless.
 
2002-12-05 05:49:07 PM
So, we've established that both Sharon and Arafat are total ass-monkeys that aren't to be trusted... glad we all can agree :)
 
2002-12-05 07:57:06 PM
Maher never had a well thought out original idea of his own; name calling is always an easier retort when you've got a vacuum between the ears like his.
 
2002-12-05 10:06:15 PM
Maher & I go way back--well, in the sense that I've been criticizing him & his shows since the dawn of time, and he did occasionally lurk about certain message boards (the current one is http://abclocal.go.com/wls -go to "message boards" then "P.I.") and steal my sh!t.
I'll never find him nearly as brilliant as he does, and certainly will never find him as funny as Bill Hicks (above or below ground), but Maher does serve his purpose. If he does nothing else but incite debate and p!ss people off, he has, at least, earned the right to suck up some oxygen. And Boy Plankton, at least, has the right idea. Sticking to the FACTS, that is. Which, you may have noticed, not one of the "BURN THE BASTARD!!!" Maher-torchers last year, was capable of DOING. Everybody just wanted an excuse to fly off the handle and rip somebody a new one, and Maher was a handy scapegoat, and Disney/ABC was a p-whipped little biatch for firing him. Bush-lickers.

Want to feel better about being an anarchistic little p!ssant? Go crank up some Bill Hicks--you will feel justified
 
Displayed 23 of 373 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report