« morford's back, back again | Main | it's starting to stink around this place »

redefining the language of war

I think I get it now.

A cease-fire relates only to firearms and missiles. It does not apply to say, bombs on buses that kill twenty people, including children.

That Palestinian dictionary sure is tricky.


The latest from murderers (not exact quote but close): "Since Israelis are striking back we are no longer bound by the terms of the ceasefire."

And I always thought "chutzpah" was a Yiddish word.

Oh, and not strictly on the subject, but here is the short version of the blame placing for the bombing of the UN building in Iraq:

Kofi: The Americans should have provided security.

Americans: We offered it, you turned it down.

Kofi: You should have overruled us.

When were Islamic terrorists ever bound by the "ceasefire"?

Nah, it's just what Orwell called "Newspeak."

Newspeak, well, it's actually an old idea, saying one thing and meaning something totally different. It's called being two-faced, and that is exactly what the palistinians are.

Screw em..they wanna kill each other so be it.

Oh and by the way..Free Kobe

I'm afraid that those folks have degenerated into gang warfare. Like the Crips and Bloods gangs here in the US. Blind hatred, incessant retaliation, and no common ground. Being a former gang-banger myself, I can understand the mentality. As we used to say:

"Til death, do us part..."

The only real ally we have besides England that contributes anything significant in the war on terrorism is Isreal,and yet our diplomats repeatedly attempt to shorten the leash.I think we should un-leash Isreal and let loose the Dogs of War.

hi can someone actually explain to me in simpler terms what the language of war means.