that goes back to 1947 or the 1967 war ... " takes 2 to tango". Your not lumping all that on hamas are you?

bring it.....

Of course not, but with that logic lets blame the arabs from the 7th century with the take of east roman (byzantine) lands.. No that would be silly.

Hamas have a goal to destroy Israel.. That is well known, even your eastern greek church will agree with that.
Hamas will never stop and they get the full support from Iran...

Hamas are a legal elected government... So was that party in germany, you know... Sure you do.

Plus does ange7 have his own opitions on the topic.. Or any other topic? Lol.. Thats one thing you aviod..

Would ange7 donate to the gaza appeal?..

... your keep rabbiting on about how evil hamas is as though I've ever defended them... have I... no. I've even spoken here about hamas's ulterior motives for continuing the was with Isreal because it's how it defines itself and gets cash from Iran etc to fund that war. I could have attacked Israel's historical record... it has far far more blood on it's hands but honestly this thread isn't a blame game that you want it to be. You answered JOSHUAH 's question about the the young children by saying “oh well that's war... hamas are evil!”. We get it … they are... but the question remains should innocent suffer. What crime has kid under 10 done? Some nut jobs on this thread even said “they deserve it... they can't even vote!!” lol wtf.... madness...

“Hamas have a goal to destroy Israel.. That is well known, even your eastern greek church will agree with that. “
Who the fck argued against that? Are you just muttering to yourself now? And what's with this b*llshit “ even your eastern greek church”. As though my religion is the stupidest of all religions... that even we get it. The whole world gets it mate because Hamas have the destruction of Isreal in their constitution ….gawd... it's hardly secret Einstein..... but irrelevance to the debate given that I never contested that point so did you go there.. Oh was it you trying to be nasty by attacking my church? Lol...try again champ...
"7th century with the take of east roman (byzantine) lands No that would be silly."
you what now? Lol mate your starting to scare ..end the weirdness please..

"Hamas are a legal elected government... So was that party in germany, you know... Sure you do."

Again ... it ain't about hamas it's about the civilians ( on both sides) that are suffering.... question was should we help... why keep moaning about hamas ...we get it dude but the humanitarian aid doesn't go to hamas despite all your repeated lies saying that you KNOW that it does. Mate aid agencies make it there business to make sure donated money doesn't get syphoned off. If it did their reputations would be lost. Your confusing the issue with aid that get handed to the governments in Africa etc by Western governments and get used to buy yachts and casinos. Government to government aid. These are 2 different things … aid agencies account for every cent.

"Plus does ange7 have his own opitions on the topic.. Or any other topic? Lol.. Thats one thing you aviod"

mahaha I'm avoiding what? ...mate even blind freddy can see what my position is... lol when has anyone not known my position on anything? I ram it down people's throats over and over again yet apparently even that is still too subtle for you . OK hint for andy …. I've gone through these posts and disagreed with EVERY person who, for one reason or another, has said none should give aid to the kids of Gaza. ….so?.....my position must be that I? …...
a. ( support) OR
b. (don't support) giving to the gaza appeal
....correct I support giving money …. the hint was in the last 5 posts arguing we ought to give money to the gaza appeal ( ffs)

You will donate to the kids of Gaza?!.. Thats great and so kind of you ange7! Hats off to you..

Your 100% sure that money donated wont fillter through to the wrong hands?..

I call myself agnostic actually, so there's another point you've totally missed. I also said I don't know which I believe regarding evolution, but was more inclined to believe creationism, not an avid follower. Check your facts, especially when they're already irrelevant to this topic.

And as I've said, it's Hamas' responsibility alone to repay the debt owed to their area's children and casualties, as this conflict was started by them. Whilst I applaud anyone else's charity and initiative to donate to those hurt, I don't see anyone having sympathy for the Israeli casualties.

Therefore I made my point a political one; there's only more focus on the Gaza strip because they were damaged more, a consequence of petty wars picked with stronger neighbours.

Ooh yes Shaun.. really mate. “another point” I've missed huh.. have you made a point yet? You said you leaned most towards creationist theory... or did you not say that?. Then ( lol) you said your an agnostic, I presumed you threw that in there to try to impress so I ignored it. You can't have an agnostic position and yet have sympathies for creationism. That's nuts mate. Agnosticism is a position people only come to after years of inner reflection and thought, it requires the dissection of years of religious doctrine …. creationism on the other hand is a position that has ZERO logic behind it. Honestly …. every logical underpinning of creationism as long since been shown to be rubbish. When you hear the world “creationist” just think to your self “ right wing Christian fundamentalist” lol... you can't be that AND a little bit agnostic. Sorry dude but your winging it. But then again you did say "I know I don't know a lot about science OR religion" over on the “Half of Britons do not believe in evolution“ thread so let's leave that their shall we.

Re the point of the topic and regarding the innocent of the civilian dead …I'm talking of the kids, the mums and newly disabled..all the people your arguing deserved what they got.... my point was yep hamas are b@stards but the money goes to help the needy not hamas. To which you responded with...

“Those innocent children can't vote anyway, so it doesn't particularly matter.” This make zero sense to me … the fact that they don't vote is in the kid's favour ...not against them... ooops do you see what you did there?
Does that mean they deserve what they got? Your basing all this on your idea that “Hamas' responsibility alone to repay the debt owed to their area's children and casualties, as this conflict was started by them “ but that shows how little thought you've put into it. That's the blame game and that's been going on “tit!” or tat since the nation of Isreal was created and the Palestinians were forcibly evicted from their own lands. Mate it ain't about who's to blame... it's about...”are innocent suffering?...can we help?”. Probably a foreign concept to you mate

then you said
“....a consequence of petty wars picked with stronger neighbours. “
plus
“If you were 4 foot 8 and picked a fight with a 6ft 8 professional wrestler, you'd have to be an idiot and would quite frankly deserve the consequences. “

I've got to talk about this too...lol...so your saying here that if you believe in something but the odds are against you then you really ought to give up and take it up the @rse. And if you don't then you deserve what you get? Am I dreaming all this ...are you real?

It's not kind of me and that wasn't my motive .... this isn't a thread about why we ought to give money....it's a thread started by you to argue why we ought not give money. Your not doing so well...

Ok ange7... More people agree with me than you.. Bless you ange7.

Any your views are weak.. Very weak!

Wrong. There are human rights charities that have alot of power to ensure that money goes to the right places...and the Israelies have been as cold as Hamas in the way theyve handled themselves. Theres been widespread and corroborated reports of cold bloodied and targeted killing/maiming of women and children. You might not have any empathy for ordinary families being torn apart and women and children being maimed and killed but thank god other people do!

lol
"More people agree with me than you" ... you came up with nothing on every point but you won because ""More people agree with me than you" ... who talks like that?
Buddy... what is right and what is wrong IS NOT a democratic process. If you and 10 others say 1 + 1 = 3 .... that doesn't make it right. Argue the points one by one as I've gone to the trouble of arguing them. Don't try yet again to short circuit the debate by claiming the win just because more people agree with you. Big deal.... bring an argument if you want to impress.

"Any your views are weak.. Very weak!"
sorry what? ... are you trying out for the next Bond villain?

lol @ ange7.


You 100% sure that money/supplies won't fall into the wrong hands?

dude.... your the one putting up the proposition that hanmas will steel the money from aid organisation. That's YOUR proposition.... you need to back it up. You can't make a statement and then argue it by asking people to disprove it 100% .... it's your argument... but instead of bothering with proof you just pulled it out of your arse. DO YOU GET IT? I don't need to PROVE your point is wrong until you actually put up some evidence or argument for why it's right. I've said that when it comes to funds falling in the wrong hands it usually government aid... ie Government to government aid where there is next to no transparency. In the case of charity money they make it there business to make all that info totally transparent and accessible. Your argument was " yeah but hehe can you guarantee hehe 100%?!!! NO haha so I win" FFS mate...even you must be bored of you.

Ange7, are you 100% sure that the money/suppies wont fall into the wrong hands?

Andyman :spin2: Your Quality Mate.

Thanks mate, and so are you.. Plus so is ange7...

awww it's love in...get a room boys. You could have brought an argument but nah heheh instead you two just "manually" supported each other. By that I mean slapped each others backs with your hands....... not w@nked each other off in some gay sex kind of way... let me just make that clear lest I'm misunderstood and the reported.( quality?)
You just keep going round and round...asking for 100% proof.
Here's the point .... your trying too prove the existence of something by demanding proof that it doesn't exist. ( stay with me mate...) eg nut jobs and wing nuts that believe in space man will argue for the existence of spacemen by asking "well do you have proof that they don't exist...100%?". It's not up to us to disprove your theory that humanitarian aid money will go to hamas... it's up to you to prove it does get diverted. At this point I'd settle anything....you've come up with nothing. Admin Edited. James.

Andyman so you'll only donate if you get a 100% guarantee? dude do what you like... this isn't about me getting you to give... it's about you trying to convince us that we ought not. Lol 100% guarantee...you want that from me? I'm not their accountant. What position am I to give a 100 % guarantee mate... and even if I could you know you still wouldn't donate. Out in the big wide world ( the thing behind those closed shutters you peer out of everyday) you don't get 100% guarantees. Will the sun rise tomorrow? probably...but 100%... nah a meteor might hit and bang it over. Is the fact that I can't give you a 100% guarantee prove anything?... no mate it's not. Bring an argument mate...

Admin Edited... 'ad hominem' arguments and too personal. James.

ps loving it... please bring it ...mon ami :P

Ange7, are you 100% sure that the money/supplies wont fall into the wrong hands?

Ange sorry i wasnt going against what you were saying, i just got bored of no one talking and decided to make a post...

dude ... this has been answered 3 times now so ...? mate don't know what I can do for you?

yeah James ... quoting practically verbatim someone else's argument doesn't count as playing the man not the ball.... it was HIS argument ... I simply highlighted it for comic effect...

no need for that... it's all just for laughs mate....

Yeh **** it everyone lets not bother helping anyone incase the money goes astray!...Do I need to add a hint of sarcasm in there? Probably