[koonter]

HAHAHAHAHAHA r u serious??? u know what the bbc is called in israel? british [bleep] corporation. you mayor "red ken" is an anti semite who admits he is biased(not in those words, but in who he supports) your whole mentality is based on a monarchy with the elite nobles looking down on every body else. plz, not biased.

and honor??? you believe in honor? whose definition of hnor??? yours, mine? what defines honor? doing the right thing dosnt mean its honorable. princple and honor are tottaly different.

bush has to defend his honor, bin ladin has his honor.

it is people like you that let honor takeover yoour honor.

think about it.

ps.. yet again i apoligize for being an [bleep]

[Advertisements]

Our mayor, thats londons mayor, im from scotland, have you been to our country and watched our news, its alot different from the world service. Elite nobles and monarchy i havent seen a positive thing about a member of the royal family on the news for a long while. The news that the rest of the world sees and what we watch are slightly different(the world service is very funny at times). Im a monarchist of sorts, but its not part of my mentality i agree with having a monarchy but a noble isnt much of a noble amynore its something that can be bought these days. Like it was on the old days.

Of course i believe in my honour, my honour is defined by me and the values that i hold, but what you are describing is pride not honour. They both have their pride bin laden doesnt live with honour so he doesnt have any and neither does George Bush neither live with it so neither have it, noth however are proud men.

If the honourable thing isnt the thing to do in principle you either have a twisted sense of honour or a twisted set of principles.

[warriorscot]

Our mayor, thats londons mayor, im from scotland, have you been to our country and watched our news, its alot different from the world service. Elite nobles and monarchy i havent seen a positive thing about a member of the royal family on the news for a long while. The news that the rest of the world sees and what we watch are slightly different(the world service is very funny at times). Im a monarchist of sorts, but its not part of my mentality i agree with having a monarchy but a noble isnt much of a noble amynore its something that can be bought these days. Like it was on the old days.

Of course i believe in my honour, my honour is defined by me and the values that i hold, but what you are describing is pride not honour. They both have their pride bin laden doesnt live with honour so he doesnt have any and neither does George Bush neither live with it so neither have it, noth however are proud men.

If the honourable thing isnt the thing to do in principle you either have a twisted sense of honour or a twisted set of principles.

[koonter]

"Of course i believe in my honour, my honour is defined by me and the values that i hold".

Why dosent bin ladin have honour if 9/11 was defined by the values he holds? and believe you me, those are very much the values he holds.

what you are saying is that every man is free to define his values and princples (or even the values and princples of his tribe or family) and thus act by them, and thus be called honourable.

this is rediculas unless you agree that there are a set BASIC rules of moral decency that ppl can be judged by. and these rules are not neccisarily in the constitution. they are in the soul of the man. that is why the courts deem someone who cant tell the difference between right and wrong....INSANE!!


soooo, if bush belives (and was proven right) that wiretapping was neccesarry to promote the safty of the citazins he swore to keep safe, and the only way to do that was keep it secret (and that wasnt enough!!) then what possible beef can you have with him??

do you honestly think that he would use the wiretappings for abusive purposes????
that it wouldnt go public if he did???

and even if he did, shouldnt we judge him for that the not now?

a civil liberty granted to us all is "presumed innoccent till proven guilty"
so why is bush presumed guilty even if proven innocent???