http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\14\story_14-9-2008_pg1_4

Zawahiri, old chap, you should not have mouthed off at Islamabad so much. 
Without Pakistan's accomodation, you would have been dead years ago. But you 
wore out your welcome in that country, as you do everywhere you go.

Chalk up another 30:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1_11

Larry Hammick wrote:

> Chalk up another 30:
>
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1_11

How many children this time?

-- 
Facts are sacred ... but comment is free

"Robin T Cox"  wrote  ...

> Larry Hammick wrote:
>
> > Chalk up another 30:
> >
>
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1
_11
>
> How many children this time?

Strange how you never get an answer to that question no matter how many
times it is asked. Perhaps you should just bask in the glory of the
blood-bath and another few dozen sand-nigger rag-heads killed and not worry
your pretty little head over the offensiveness and evil of such murder ?
Seems to work well enough for Larry & Co.

It sure does though seem to be a funny way to fight a moral war, by not
caring about the innocent slaughtered. But what does it matter as long as
there's dead folk to crow over ? Nothing else fills a hateful blood-lust
like it.

The Happy Hippy wrote:
> "Robin T Cox"  wrote  ...
> 
>> Larry Hammick wrote:
>>
>>> Chalk up another 30:
>>>
> http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1
> _11
>> How many children this time?

> 
> It sure does though seem to be a funny way to fight a moral war, by not
> caring about the innocent slaughtered. 

Guess Churchill & FDR never got that memo either, huh ?

Why, by the way, are you assuming that innocents were slaughtered here ?

"Jesse"  wrote ...

> The Happy Hippy wrote:
> > "Robin T Cox"  wrote  ...
> >
> >> Larry Hammick wrote:
> >>
> >>> Chalk up another 30:
> >>>
> >
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1
> > _11
> >> How many children this time?
>
> >
> > It sure does though seem to be a funny way to fight a moral war, by not
> > caring about the innocent slaughtered.
>
> Guess Churchill & FDR never got that memo either, huh ?
>
> Why, by the way, are you assuming that innocents were slaughtered here ?

I'm not. That's a deliberately deceitful claim based on you snipping what I
wrote to present what I did write out of context..

The Happy Hippy wrote:
> "Jesse"  wrote ...
> 
>> The Happy Hippy wrote:
>>> "Robin T Cox"  wrote  ...
>>>
>>>> Larry Hammick wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Chalk up another 30:
>>>>>
> http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1
>>> _11
>>>> How many children this time?
>>> It sure does though seem to be a funny way to fight a moral war, by not
>>> caring about the innocent slaughtered.

>> Guess Churchill & FDR never got that memo either, huh ?
>>
>> Why, by the way, are you assuming that innocents were slaughtered here ?
> 
> I'm not. That's a deliberately deceitful claim based on you snipping what I
> wrote to present what I did write out of context..

I think the core issue with you is that you don't recognize any of the 
various actions against radical muslims as legitimate - You therefore 
regard them all as innocent, since the actions against them, in your 
view, are illegal.
Fair assessment ?

Care to tackle the issue of Churchill & FDR wantonly slaughtering 
100,000's of innocents, and how they can be viewed as great men in 
history for doing so ?

"Jesse"  wrote ...

> The Happy Hippy wrote:
> > "Jesse"  wrote ...
> >
> >> The Happy Hippy wrote:
> >>> "Robin T Cox"  wrote  ...
> >>>
> >>>> Larry Hammick wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Chalk up another 30:
> >>>>>
> >
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1
> >>> _11
> >>>> How many children this time?
> >>> It sure does though seem to be a funny way to fight a moral war, by
not
> >>> caring about the innocent slaughtered.
>
> >> Guess Churchill & FDR never got that memo either, huh ?
> >>
> >> Why, by the way, are you assuming that innocents were slaughtered here
?
> >
> > I'm not. That's a deliberately deceitful claim based on you snipping
what I
> > wrote to present what I did write out of context..
>
> I think the core issue with you is that you don't recognize any of the
> various actions against radical muslims as legitimate - You therefore
> regard them all as innocent, since the actions against them, in your
> view, are illegal.
> Fair assessment ?

No. But when have you ever come up with a fair assessment.

Explain to me how a six month old baby is a terorrist who deserves to be
killed. Because that's what you applaud.


> Care to tackle the issue of Churchill & FDR wantonly slaughtering
> 100,000's of innocents, and how they can be viewed as great men in
> history for doing so ?

I believe I have in the past; they're both cunts for killing innocents. How
are they viewed as heroes ? Because, like now, people don't give a fuck or
would prefer to forget the murder. That people label Churchill and FDR
heroes doesn't mean they are.

In message <5M4Ak.178428$J72.134116@fe05.news.easynews.com>, Jesse 
 writes
>The Happy Hippy wrote:
>> "Robin T Cox"  wrote  ...
>>
>>> Larry Hammick wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chalk up another 30:
>>>>
>> http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\09\15\story_15-9-2008_pg1
>> _11
>>> How many children this time?
>
>>  It sure does though seem to be a funny way to fight a moral war, by 
>>not
>> caring about the innocent slaughtered.
>
>Guess Churchill & FDR never got that memo either, huh ?

Churchill was last century Things have changed a lot since then

>
>Why, by the way, are you assuming that innocents were slaughtered here ?

Almost certainly  based on the balance of probability.



-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/