Politics - 7 October 2006

Give back the land, or give them proper compensation.

2006-10-07 01:52:54 · 19 answers · asked by Villain 6

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010891.php
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/060222/2006022201.html
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-accused-of-funding-somali-clash/2006/05/17/1147545390362.html
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=45918
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/06/eveningnews/main616006.shtml

..how are you going to stop terrorism if you keep funding it?

2006-10-07 01:44:51 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

Forget about the damn terrorists,there's terrorists in every religion.and if you are going to answer angrily,or with answers like"Because islam is a false damn religion" or " Coz muslims are cowards" etc. don't waste your time answering please.

2006-10-07 01:38:40 · 25 answers · asked by GaBRiaNo 2

2006-10-07 01:28:50 · 8 answers · asked by sanaaz 1

In addition to strengthening the black market, it seems to me as if the only thing gun control will ultimately do is emasculate the people at a time when the left keeps reminding us of how dangerous our government has become to basic freedoms.sorry, but seeing someone like Michael Moore make documentaries like Bowling for Columbine one minute and Farenhieght 9/11(Which was correct) the next makes no sense.Your thoughts please...

2006-10-07 01:25:18 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-07 00:43:46 · 21 answers · asked by candyness 1

2006-10-07 00:41:44 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

I was reading this article this morning, and saw this. It sounds like what the conservatives have been saying they want.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061005/wl_nm/germany_grave_dc

2006-10-07 00:21:48 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

Few people seem to be able to correctly attach a political position to these terms, as evidenced by the two questions in my history asking what both terms mean. They've just become generic insults the right and left trade. Few liberals attacking neo-conservatives have read Strauss or Kristol or really seem to know much about neo-conservatism. Likewise the right attacking liberals seem to know or credit little about the history of liberalism, and seem oblivious to the fact that the majority of politicians left and right self-identified as liberals just a few decades ago. And the irony of course is that they're very similar positions - neo-conservatism is essentially liberalism and an acceptance of leftish ideas like welfare state on social issues, but with hawkish foreign policy. Both ideas are actually quite beautiful as political philosophies, but nobody seems to care about the idealogies. Has our bickering stripped these terms of meaning, and should we do away with them?

2006-10-07 00:21:12 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous