January 25, 2009

Why I love 'em

The Hatemonger's Quarterly on the Israel-Gaza conflict.

Posted by Hube at January 25, 2009 10:53 AM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

Aptly named, for sure! Moreover, there's no mention of Israel's unwillingness to negotiate instead of making war.

Posted by: Perry at January 26, 2009 10:00 AM

Negotiate what?!! How long to wait before they start firing rockets again. Israel didn't start the war. You don't hear them talking of wiping all of the Arab states off of the face of the earth, do you?

Posted by: h. at January 26, 2009 12:07 PM

That makes too much sense for Perry, h. And he is woefully short in that arena.

Negotiate ... with groups dedicated to your outright annihilation.

You really are one thick moron, aren't you Perry?

Posted by: Hube at January 26, 2009 01:37 PM

Come on, Hube. There's plenty of room for compromise. Hamas wants to kill all Jews while Israel doesn't want any Jews killed. Why can't they just compromise on around 50% of Jews getting killed? So simple a compromise; only Israeli intransigence could keep it from happening.

Posted by: Paul Smith at January 26, 2009 02:48 PM

Negotiate what? A peace treaty, involving a two state solution. Hamas told Carter they are willing; are the Israelis willing, or are we going to get the preconditions again? A big piece is the pre-1967 borders, which Hamas may be willing to negotiate, according to Carter. Now we have George Mitchell joining with Tony Blair as envoys. The time is right, right now!!!

Posted by: Perry at January 27, 2009 09:56 AM

LOL!! "Peace treaty," huh? Let's see ... what were the preconditions the Israelis wanted, Perry? Something like "drop the Hamas Charter" which calls for the elimination of Israel and Jews everywhere? Y'mean THAT silly little item?

You're bordering on sick if you think that's an "unnecessary precondition," Perry.

Posted by: Hube at January 27, 2009 10:16 AM

why 1967 borders??

why not the 1928 borders? it's older so it must be better

Posted by: annoni at January 28, 2009 10:45 PM