Ken justifies suicide nuts

The Sun [UK] ^ | 7/20/5

[SmithL]

MAYOR Ken Livingstone faced calls to quit last night after trying to justify suicide bombings.

He said: “Given that the Palestinians don’t have jet fighters and don’t have tanks, they only have their bodies to use as weapons.

“In that unfair balance, that is what people use.”

Last night Lord Janner of the World Jewish Congress said: “His sad attempt to justify Middle Eastern suicide bombers is a betrayal of the hundreds of innocent people who suffered from this terrorist barbarism in London.”

The Board of Deputies of British Jews added: “It is absurd he should parrot this apology for indiscriminate mass murder.”

Tory Ann Widdecombe demanded Mr Livingstone resign.

[SmithL]

Red Ken, staying true to form.

[telebob]

Yes. His tears for the victims of the London attacks were crocodile tears after all. My question: Why is this sonofabitch the mayor of one of the worlds great cities?

[Lijahsbubbe]

He looks like he just smoke a blunt. Old Ken's brain is fried for sure.

[claudiustg]

Is he saying that the Palestinians are justified for suicide bombing, but that the homegrown terrorists are not? Or is he saying that both are justified? Either way he should count himself lucky not to be dragged out and hung from a lamppost.

[John Lenin]

You can only hope the chickens come home to roost in his household.

[spyone]

Very well said.

[Lijahsbubbe]

, they only have their bodies to use as weapons.

....and Ken has his piehole to use as an a-hole.

[Theresawithanh]

Yeah, good ol Red Ken! I saw a picture of him on the tube the day after the bombings, and the poor guy was standing holding onto the strap, for goshsakes. Don't you people have any respect for the wise and wonderful mayor of Oz---er, London?

[LibertarianInExile]

If he wants to compare suicide bombers to military bombers, that cries out for the question: why do these Islamist 'military' types always seem to attack CIVILIANS?

What a bastard.

[river rat]

".....they only have their bodies to use as weapons.

Against whom?

Perhaps this is justification to kill every one of the sonsuvbitches....as a self defense measure..

Semper Fi

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Margaret Thatcher had the right idea!

In fact, she didn't go far enough.

My solution?

Abolish this post altogether.

Or at least until London voters get some common sense.

[American in Israel]

Perhaps Ken should think that Mass Murder is unjustifiable before he pontificates on the choice of methods. After all Palestinians have axes, does that justify Axe Murder? Besides, they also have mortars, rockets and machine guns, which they use daily against the suburbs. Is it OK to use mortars to bomb your neighbor just because you have them?

What about people like Americans who not only are not allowed tanks and planes, but are not allowed mortars or machine guns. Is it OK for Americans to vote with nuclear weapons against the democratic party?

What a moron, any blather to excuse his hatred of God.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

"they only have their bodies to use as weapons.

“In that unfair balance, that is what people use.”

Ken tells us with the term 'unfair' where his heart is.

[D-fendr]

I'll say it again:

If Londoners don't boot this guy, they've learned nothing.

[sofaman]

The anti-Semite Mayor of one of the great cities of the world. And the Londoners haven't run him out of office yet. Speaks volumes...that along with Sheri Blair's lovely comments the other day. No doubt in my mind where their sympathies lie.

[AngelesCrestHighway]

Does he know Jim McDermott??.....

[Prime Choice]

Livingstone ain't nothing but a sock puppet for bin Laden. That's been a known quantity for years now.

[melsec]

This schmuck should remember that all Ghandi and his followers had were their bodies. Jesus and his followers gave their bodies to the greatest cause. Yet none of these and many who have followed killed innocent people to make their point. In fact it was because their cause was just that they did not have to.

Mel

[Lessingham]

Here, here! Ken Livingstone is not morally qualified for any position of public trust. Give that moral cretin the boot!

[Kozak]

The "Palestinians" had more planes, tanks, and artillery on their side in the form of all the arab nations that repeatedly went to war with Isreal. They just can't fight.

And if all those Arab nations had spent those billions on making a life for the Palestinians instead of on weapons, forcing them into camps and twisting them into insanity, we would have peace in the middle east.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/CarolineGlick/cg20050710.shtml

[dennisw]

Red Ken .... you rotten commie bastard, Euro socialist scumbag. F off and die!

[dennisw]

If Londoners don't boot this guy, they've learned nothing.

Problem is that I hear he runs London very competently. Despite his loony left leanings and sucking up to anything Muhammedan

[Exeter]

“Given that the Palestinians don’t have jet fighters and don’t have tanks, they only have their bodies to use as weapons.

“In that unfair balance, that is what people use.”

Doesn't this statement justify the tactics used by the IRA over the years? The only difference between the IRA and Al-Queada seems to be that the the former have figured out how to use fuses instead of gullible young people to detonate their explosives...

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

..........................................

It's not clear to me that these are new comments, rather a rehash of what he's said before.

[bvw]

Well, the Pakistani's have fighter jets and tanks. The Saudi's have fighter jets and tanks. The Egyptians have fighter jets and tanks.

Yet on 7/7 British-Pakistanis suicide bombed London, and on 9/11 Saudis and Egyptians suicide bombed the US.

So the logical inference is that having planes and tanks doesn't make one iota of difference.

[trisham]

Uh...agreed.

[Lijahsbubbe]

What a moron, any blather to excuse his hatred of God.

Your entire post was wonderful, but this really is the crux of the matter.

[dervish]

Thanks for the ping. Great article by Glick.


“The minute we relativize terror - the minute, that is, that we declare that it is defensible in some circumstances - we make it defensible everywhere. You say it's a legitimate form of warfare in Tel Aviv but not in London? I say it's legitimate in London but not in Paris (the French have no soldiers in Iraq), and someone else will say it's legitimate in Paris but not in Prague (there's no large, lower-class, discriminated-against Muslim minority in the Czech Republic).

‘snip’

The ideologists of terror seek to justify themselves by claiming that the murders they commit are not indiscriminate, since they distinguish between innocent and guilty countries. This is true. What terrorists do not do is distinguish between innocent and guilty people. From their point of view, no one living in a country that is guilty - Israel, for example - can be innocent.
To accept this contention, or even to condone it in part, is to undermine the entire basis of Western morality. It is to revert to the law of tribal warfare and the blood feud, the idea that, if someone from your tribe kills someone from my tribe, your life is forfeit.”

Hillel Halkin

http://www.nysun.com/article/16840n

[demkicker]

Too bad Ken Livingstone wasn't riding one of the trains and sitting next to one of these 'poor & desperate' homicide bombers that day.

[D-fendr]

thanks for your reply…

he runs London very competently

I do hope that Londoners see that making the trains run on time is not as valuable when they start blowing up…

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Once you start inviting individuals like Gerry Adams to the White House, and arrive at the judgment that narco-Marxist terror gangs like the FARC are trustworthy parties that you can negotiate with, or that terrorist organizations like ETA or the ETTE have legitimate demands-even if they accompany those demands with ruthless attacks against innocent civilians-or that the architect of modern terrorism, i.e. Yasser Arafat, should be treated with kid gloves, than you are leading your people down the road to ruin.

Terrorism is terrorism.

There's no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

[Mr. Jeeves]

He said: “Given that the Palestinians don’t have jet fighters and don’t have tanks, they only have their bodies to use as weapons.

It's worse than that, Ken: they don't even have a legitimate cause. ;)

[Sam Gamgee]

How many times do we have to hear this ignorant nonsense. I truly hope the masses don't buy this. It is a great justification for guerrilla warfare - NOT terrorism. It's akin to saying that you are not the biggest boy on the block, so you have every right to beat up on the biggest boy's little sister and then run into hiding.

[SunkenCiv]

"Why is this sonofabitch the mayor of one of the worlds great cities?"

As long as he's the mayor of it, it isn't one of the world's great cities.

[SunkenCiv]

Ping!

[Irish_Thatcherite]

Q: Who is Livingstone anyway?

A: A typical example of a far left nut elected as a protest vote!

[Berosus]

Just when I thought British liberals had learned their lesson, Ken goes back to his old routine. Early this year, Yaakov Kirschen, the author of the Jerusalem Post comic strip "Dry Bones," introduced the Shmendrik Awards, dedicated to those who use good intentions to promote anti-Semitism. Ken Livingstone won first prize.

http://www.drybonesproject.com

[Convert from ECUSA]

Memo from Virginia to red-as-Lenin's-drawers bolshie-eurabian Ken:





You are now a grease spot, red Ken!

[dennisw]

Ken the red/red Ken