LeviF

Well, we pretty much conquered the Iroquois and co. Romans, crusaders, Turks, Egyptians, and the like conquered the Jews (or, more accurately, conquered their land). Again, the only point of disagreement here is whether historic "right" to land means/should mean anything.

See my edit, I'm trying to draw a comparison between two CONQUERED PEOPLES. Perhaps I should have used that phrase earlier.

Are you familiar with the Sullivan Campaign? In any case, I brought up the Iroquois because they were pretty much a conquered people, much like the Jews were. Only might makes right when it comes to nation ownership. The state of Israel has the might, they should stay. Historic "right" means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

So we're back to the homeland thing? In that case, we ought to defer to the Iroquois Confederacy's right to most of New York.

Status unchanged? How do you mean? The Turks dominated the area for 200 years or so. The Egyptian kings dominated the area for 400+ years before that. Hell, you have to go back to the Kingdom of Judah to find an extended period of time in which the Jews ruled the area. I'm not saying they shouldn't stay there now, there's no way to move them without quite a bit of !@#$ing **** up (not to mention they're the only real ally we have in the middle of those Arab states). I just think that people yelling about how the Jews have some sort of right to the land because of Old Testament-era kings is somewhat ridiculous.

Oh I know they've been there for quite some time. So Jewish presence = Jewish right to land? You're joking, right?

Did everyone else miss this? Tom has a friend?!

Yep, if you really want to die, you do it right.

No, but he was probably the only Arab leader that Israel was even remotely comfortable with. He wasn't an enemy of the West, at the very least.

In the words of reddogblitz, "I feel safer already!"

Either that, or he's actually doing it. In order for him to deny it later, he can't acknowledge my perfect plan.

That's it, Tom, send him a PM explaining how much you miss him. He'll either have an aneurysm or he'll come running back claiming that you sent him a heartfelt PM (which of course you will deny, and in the same breath tell him how much of an idiot he is).

I always love the idea that kids watching people get blown up is fine, but a seeing a pair of breasts through the same medium will make them loose/crackheads/immoral. I am, of course, not referring to any parents in particular, it's just a mentality that I've noticed with some parents nowadays that baffles me entirely. It's a mentality apparently shared by the bodies that provide the age "ratings" and "recommendations" for TV shows and movies.

5 inches on the ground here, it'll stay that way until April or so.

This is still one of my favorite youtube clips. The booing that only furthers his case is priceless.

Just talked to the parents of a close friend of mine who is studying abroad in Cairo this semester. They're scared shitless.

Pepperoncinis are the best. I bite off the end of one, drain the juice over my pizza/sub/salad, then eat the rest. Delicious.

Here's how I appreciate Tom... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp8dSrJ13DI

I no longer see one either. They might take it down as they get closer to the deadline.

Let's be honest, you don't need to be any kind of stalker to find someone's facebook profile. Just an update on New Year's Day:

Found his facebook profile. The bastard posted an article about Tiger on Monday, but can't take the time to give us updates on the lentils?

The only response to a request for a movie idea is A Serbian Film.

Same album...

A Serbian Film