Soback

quote:Originally posted by Darkling: quote:Originally posted by Soback: BS Darkling. So stop with BS Darkling. Yeah, people can be poor, but it's UP TO THEM to pull through, So what specifically did I say that is BS? that it takes time to get out of Poverty? So you're saying that ALL Poor People ARE Lazy. Was your Mom Lazy, is that why she was Poor? The BS is that A LOT, never get out of poverty. Even when provided with choices, they would STILL sit on their behinds, getting money that was robbed from me by the government, rather than work and EARN their living. why would you go to work and earn $1500 a month, if you can sit at home and get $400 a month in cash, $400 a month in food stamps AND a section 8 appartment. If my mom was lazy, we would STILL be where we were before, and I would've never gotten through flight school. That's my point, people who have the drive, they make it, no matter what, they succeed. They go for it again and again, even if they fail they keep going. They find a job, they open a bussiness, they DO something, anything. They don't sit there watching TV and muttering how they want that car and it's "unfair" that they don't have it. Then the government comes in, and literally enslaves me, takes what I earn and gives it to them.

quote:Originally posted by Chavis: True, but Phil spent his life on defining what is Human. And I don't think you conservative jerk offs qualify. Check his final trilogy starting with 'Valis'. ROFL, A statement of a thinking mind. Yet another one, reduced to his true self, spitting failing insults. Great minds think alike. If you check by the way, Shakespeare, Donne, Milton, and many other great writers wrote in Iambic pentameter, WHAT HAVE YOUR LIBERAL MIND PRODUCED? Karl Marx, Lenin? ROFL You FEAR that which is quoted above in my posts, that is why you reply in insults. You have NOTHING of VALUE to say in return, no coherent, logical, statement. LOL, I laugh because I see how trully weak you are, how when confronted with logic that threatens your way of existence of leaching, looting people like me of our earnings, you are terrified when someone stands up and says that they will NOT be your slave. And when they say that in a coherent statement, and debute your social wellfare by saying that THEIR life is NOT for YOUR benefit but is for THEIRS, you insult them in return because you have NOTHING else to say in return. ROFL, the biggest difference between YOU and ME is, YOU and your SOCIAL SYSTEM need people like ME to SURVIVE, I however, and people LIKE ME, CAN LIVE, without people like YOU.

"America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to "the common good," but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages adn cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance -- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way." (Ayn Rand)

" "Happiness is not to be achieved at the command of emotional whims. Happiness is not the satisfaction of whatever irrational wishes you might blindly attempt to indulge. Happiness is a state of non-contradictory joyÔÇöa joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values and does not work for your own destruction, not the joy of escaping from your mind, but of using your mind's fullest power, not the joy of faking reality, but of achieving values that are real, not the joy of a drunkard, but of a producer. Happiness is possible only to a rational man, the man who desires nothing but rational goals, seeks nothing but rational values and finds his joy in nothing but rational actions. "Just as I support my life, neither by robbery nor alms, but by my own effort, so I do not seek to derive my happiness from the injury or the favor of others, but earn it by my own achievement. Just as I do not consider the pleasure of others as the goal of my life, so I do not consider my pleasure as the goal of the lives of others. Just as there are no contradictions in my values and no conflicts among my desiresÔÇöso there are no victims and no conflicts of interest among rational men, men who do not desire the unearned and do not view one another with a cannibal's lust, men who neither make sacrifice nor accept them. "The symbol of all relationships among such men, the moral symbol of respect for human beings, is the trader. We, who live by values, not by loot, are traders, both in matter and in spirit. A trader is a man who earns what he gets and does not give or take the undeserved. A trader does not ask to be paid for his failures, nor does he ask to be loved for his flaws. A trader does not squander his body as fodder or his soul as alms. Just as he does not give his work except in trade for material values, so he does not give the values of his spiritÔÇöhis love, his friendship, his esteemÔÇöexcept in payment and in trade for human virtues, in payment for his own selfish pleasure, which he receives from men he can respect. The mystic parasites who have, throughout the ages, reviled the traders and held them in contempt, while honoring the beggars and the looters, have known the secret motive of their sneers: a trader is the entity they dreadÔÇöa man of justice. "Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? NoneÔÇöexcept the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects and to all of existence: rationality. I deal with men as my nature and their demands: by means of reason. I seek or desire nothing from them except such relations as they care to enter of their own voluntary choice. It is only with their mind that I can deal and only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest coincides with theirs. When they don't, I enter no relationship; I let dissenters go their way and I do not swerve from mine. I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men who surrender theirs. I have nothing to gain from fools or cowards; I have no benefits to seek from human vices: from stupidity, dishonesty or fear. The only value men can offer me is the work of their mind. When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit. "Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may sanction or forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiateÔÇödo you hear me? no man may startÔÇöthe use of physical force against others. "To interpose the threat of physical destruction between a man and his perception of reality, is to negate and paralyze his means of survival; to force-him to act against his own judgment, is like forcing him to act against his own sight. Whoever, to whatever purpose or extent, initiates the use of force, is a killer acting on the premise of death in a manner wider than murder: the premise of destroying man's capacity to live. "Do not open your mouth to tell me that your mind has convinced you of your right to force my mind. Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun begins. When you declare that men are irrational animals and propose to treat them as such, you define thereby your own character and can no longer claim the sanction of reasonÔÇöas no advocate of contradictions can claim it. There can be no 'right' to destroy the source of rights, the only means of judging right and wrong: the mind. "To force a man to drop his own mind and to accept your will as a substitute, with a gun in place of a syllogism, with terror in place of proof, and death as the final argumentÔÇöis to attempt to exist in defiance of reality. Reality demands of man that he act for his own rational interest; your gun demands of him that he act against it. Reality threatens man with death if he does not act on his rational judgment: you threaten him with death if he does. You place him into a world where the price of his life is the surrender of all the virtues required by lifeÔÇöand death by a process of gradual destruction is all that you and your system will achieve, when death is made to be the ruling power, the winning argument in a society of men. "Be it a highwayman who confronts a traveler with the ultimatum: 'Your money or your life,' or a politician who confronts a country with the ultimatum: 'Your children's education or your life,' the meaning of that ultimatum is: 'Your mind or your life'ÔÇöand neither is possible to man without the other. "If there are degrees of evil, it is hard to say who is the more contemptible: the brute who assumes the right to force the mind of others or the moral degenerate who grants to others the right to force his mind. That is the moral absolute one does not leave open to debate. I do not grant the terms of reason to men who propose to deprive me of reason. I do not enter discussions with neighbors who think they can forbid me to think. I do not place my moral sanction upon a murderer's wish to kill me. When a man attempts to deal with me by force, I answer himÔÇöby force." Another part of John Galts speach.

"You know that you can't give away everything and starve yourself. You've forced yourselves to live with undeserved, irrational guilt. Is it ever proper to help another man? No, if he demands it as his right or as a duty that you owe him. Yes, if it's your own free choice based on your judgment of the value of that person and his struggle. This country wasn't built by men who sought handouts. In its brilliant youth, this country showed the rest of the world what greatness was possible to Man and what happiness is possible on Earth. Then it began apologizing for its greatness and began giving away its wealth, feeling guilty for having produced more than ikts neighbors. Twelve years ago, I saw what was wrong with the world and where the battle for Life had to be fought. I saw that the enemy was an inverted morality and that my acceptance of that morality was its only power. I was the first of the men who refused to give up the pursuit of his own happiness in order to serve others. To those of you who retain some remnant of dignity and the will to live your lives for yourselves, you have the chance to make the same choice. Examine your values and understand that you must choose one side or the other. Any compromise between good and evil only hurts the good and helps the evil. If you've understood what I've said, stop supporting your destroyers. Don't accept their philosophy. Your destroyers hold you by means of your endurance, your generosity, your innocence, and your love. Don't exhaust yourself to help build the kind of world that you see around you now. In the name of the best within you, don't sacrifice the world to those who will take away your happiness for it. The world will change when you are ready to pronounce this oath: I swear by my Life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for the sake of mine. " Part of John Galts speach from Atlas Shrugged.

BS Darkling. I've been poor. My mom worked TWO minimum wage jobs when I was in high school. We had noodles for dinner. My mom cried because we didn't know how to pay the bills. There was a time when we slept on the floor because we didn't have beds. There was a time when we had to stay with her friends because we had no place to live. WE HAVE PULLED THROUGH....AND HAVE NEVER BEEN ON GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE. NEVER.... There was a time when I had 3 JOBS, third one NOT to pay the bills, BUT JUST BECAUSE I WANTED TO, I WANTED to WORK. TO HAVE MORE MONEY. I took out LOANS, to pay for my education. I am a PILOT now, flying planes. So stop with BS Darkling. Yeah, people can be poor, but it's UP TO THEM to pull through, I DO NOT OWN MY NEIGHBOR A LIVING. Just because he is alive and breathing doesn't entitle him to the money I make. Just because he is broke, doesn't mean I have to pay for his medical. Just because he has no food, doesn't mean I have to feed him. If I am FORCED to give up the product of MY labor, to support another, it's called SLAVERY, for only a slave CAN NOT keep what he produces. Go read Atlas Shrugged, it will teach you what it means to be an INDIVIDUAL, a HUMAN. It has happened before, in Russia, it is happening now, in America.

http://www.illwillpress.com/drugs.html Parental Advisory, Explicit content!!!

quote:Originally posted by Darkling: We know that the Oil Companies are paying off the guy who invented the Carberator that gets 100 Miles per gallon Actually it was about 65mi/per gallon

ROFL, Atlas Shrugged.

First, I wasn't talking about you $ilk. You hear that statement about the oil companies from a lot of people, and I was just basically ranting. Second, the price fluctuation fluctuates due to supply AND demand. Either one can influence the price. Lets say they pump out 100 barrels a day, and people consume 50 barrels a day. Well the oil would be cheap, in abundance. Now lets say people started consuming 90 barrels a day. Now the supply didn't change, they haven't drilled new wells, and it still costs the same to pump that oil out, however, now it's harder to come by a barrel of oil, the prices go up slightly since the supply still is higher than consumption. NOW, lets say the population started consuming 200 barrels a day, and the US oil compnies can't keep up, (I can go off on a spree blaiming government red tape, enviro mentals, and a plethora of other reasons), their costs to pump the oil are still the same, BUT they are working at full capacity, to satisfy only half the demand. The rest is IMPORTED which drives the price higher because of whatever OPEC or any other foreign power charge for their oil + transportation costs, WHY should US company charge the same as they did before when the demand was lower for their 100 barrels if they can charge more and YOU will still buy it? It's the law of supply and demand. That's why the prices are going higher and higher, ESPECIALLY around the huricane hit area. A lot of gas stations there will be selling their STOCK and will not be receiving new deliveries for a WHILE. Thus effectively out of bussiness. OR even if they do recieve new deliveries, those will be delivered from farther away, so you can add the cost of that transportation to your tag. Also, remember that supply side, well guess what, now we (home companies in US) are not extracing as much as we used to, now EVEN MORE oil is imported because the internal supply dropped (Which barrel of gas costs more? OPECs, or the one delivered from GULF coast? I don't know, but I my bet is on OPECs). Then the demand side kicks in, and the rarity of availabe product (refined fuel). THAT'S why the price hit $6, a gallon, NOT because the oil companies are sitting there and thinking "Hey, let's charge up the wazzooo to those poor hurricane hit bastards". If I go up to the gas station, and want 10 gallons, and there's 100 others to offer the same price, and the gas station owner only has 50 gallons to sell, well guess what, he will sell it at the highest possible price, IT'S NOT FIRST COME FIRST SERVE, it's WHAT YOU ARE WILLING TO PAY. He will charge ONLY so much as 5 people out of those 100 would be willing to pay (10 gallons per person in this example), it would do him no good to charge lower because then he would be out of gas with little profit and out of product to sell, it would do him no good to have the price too high as nobody would buy that fuel, and it does him no good for that fuel to sit in his storage tanks. Anyway, to wrap it up. The price will be climbing UNTILL people will not be buying it anymore at such a price, OR you will start to see serious economical consequences of such high prices. If there's oil however, you can trust the retail side to sell it for as cheap as possible, and still make profit, rather than for it to sit around collecting dust so to speak. Remember, when the fuel sits and doesn't bring in the dough, their people still need to be paid, equipment maintained, new wells prospected and build, ect... [ 09-04-2005, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Soback ]

Alright, lets say that the oil companies are operating at 20% profit margin. Hmmm...where do you think that 20 percent goes? How about building new wells, new equipment, new prospecing. That 20 percent means that the company can theoretically expand by 20% so that the growing consumption, meaning YOU, can put gas in your tank, heat your home, cook your breakfast, and buy new tires for that winter season. Do you want them to sell gas to you at break even price? And when the well runs dry, then what? Or how about when the demand grows? THINK. Where are they going to get the money to prospect, drill new wells, and buy new equipment if not from that 20%? Another point, do you really think that they ententionally charge as much as they do per barrel of crude? Do you think that they would purposly charge you so much so that you couldn't afford their gas? That would put them out of bussiness. THINK. If nobody buys their gas, what good does it do them in their storage tanks as opposed YOUR fuel tank, or the gas that your stove runs on, or your house heater, the rubber products that YOU buy, ect.... STOP jumping on this bandwagon. THINK for yourself, the stupid people yell "the oil companies are killing us with their prices, thier profits are unfair", and every sheep on the planet joins in and starts bleeing, never bothering to actually THINK for themselfs what would THEY DO without those same oil companies, and what would the oil companies do without that profit margin. While those that do think, KNOW. Know that those sheeple who can't think and understand would devolve without the oil companies and their profits which allow them to expand, and go back to living in caves, heated with burning wood. But then again, the envoromentalists would put a stop to that quick enough. Burning wood is bad for the forest, causes global warming, and as bad as second hand smoke.

Open up that Java script, right click in the window, choose properties, and you will see the actual link in the window that will pop up, cut and paste, done.

It looks like the front legs have been chopped off, that's why the short appearance. If you look closely there's some blood there. Not only that, but I can hardly imagine that puny thing attacking a goat to suck it's blood.

quote:Originally posted by Chavis: What resident liberals? quote:Originally posted by Prez: Easy! We're all friends here... aren't we? LOL

quote:Originally posted by nomad: Prez: Thx for the semantic help, I always appreciate it, sincerely. quote:Well then the message to Palestinians should be rather clear - turn over or kill the murderers your harboring or the attacks will continue. Simple, right? Yes, simple. Would you accept the same methodology in handling poor US neighborhoods plagued by crime, drug traffic and gang wars ? After all, in these places the local residents also know approximatively who does what... No ? Why ? Either you consider that collective punishment is not legal (what the majority of countries have agreed and specifically signed international treaties banning it, USA included), either you consider that it is sound and you apply it everywhere. Now saying that this isn't thinkable here, but is acceptable there, is the way open to any kind of abuse. I hope you are aware of this... I guess you don't know that in US you can go to prison for knowing of the murderer and where he is, yet not turning him inn while he keeps commiting murders.

quote:Originally posted by $iLk: 205 attacks per day... through all the ISP's in China. How would they know if it was distributed? Hackers find a way around anything. Even government regulation. Even government blocks. LOL, "Through ALL the ISP's in China". I can count ALL the ISP's in China on ONE HAND. And the beauty of monitoring software is, you can install it to run on ALL servers.

quote:Originally posted by $iLk: Soback: Assume it was Chinese Hackers - would the Chinese Government know the terminating IP to block? And the way the internet works, it's a lot easier to tell all ISP's in China to block the word "Freedom" than it is to block an IP that they might not have themselves. It doesn't all go through a single computer you know? No, it doesn't, but that's the interesting part, the program with the US GOVERMENT IP lists can be installed on ALL their servers. And that's just the SIMPLEST way, through IP addresses. I am not even talking about a script that scans the command line that would be executed and recognizing hacker patterns to identify what is going through their servers.

quote:Originally posted by nomad: Soback: There are hundreds of places were the US would never get access to logs. Bielorussia, Myanmar, Iran, Zimbabwe or Transdniestr just to cite a few. You think that hackers working for the Chinese government would simply use a direct connection to screw US interests ? That they would not reroute their stream trough so-called "zombies" acting as proxies ? The only thing established is that the backtrace ENDS with chinese IP's due to lack of collaboration of the chinese authorities, what prohibits to either continue the trace or irrevocably identify a chinese originator. It's the only assumption you can make at this point. Then, concerning monitoring, you don't have a clue about what you are speaking. Effective monitoring doesen't only consists in logging data but also requieres to analyse it. Do you have the slighest idea about the limitations of automated recognition systems linked to the terabytes of data who flow each second between countries ? Probably not. Check "steganography" to begin to get a clue... You obviously did'n realize yet that is better not to pretend things when you have no proof... So you telling me that to write a program that scans ALL (MILLIONS) of text messages a day, and terminates the one with a certain word in it is possible, yet it's impossible to implement a program that terminates a connection when a ping is send to a certain IP address (like a US security site). Yeah, maybe it's also impossible to write a program that instead of terminating that connection, will create a dummy IP and backtrack the pings to a hackers computer. Oh Nomad, when will you LEARN, when you say ---> "Check "steganography" to begin to get a clue..." <--- who you are talking TO.

http://images.ibsys.com/2005/0825/4894992_320X240.jpg http://images.ibsys.com/2005/0825/4894994_320X240.jpg http://wnbc.feedroom.com/iframeset.jsp?ord=110407 <--- Video

And I guarantee you, the way China monitors EVERYTHING. They KNOW who made the attacks, and they LET the attacks continue. Even if they turn out to be not the originator, does that make them innocent? I think not. If French (no matter how much I despise them) was attacked through US servers, daily, and US NOT backtracking the signals for OVER A YEAR, reporting that to France, and taking action. I WOULD blame US as much as I blame China right now. Just to show you, that there is RIGHT and there is WRONG, and I don't take the side of WRONG no matter what.

Really, you think China, while it monitors EVERY SINGLE TEXT message that their citizens send to each other, and blocks out the ones that they think are "inapropriate", doesn't monitor what passes through their servers? Yeah, I think they DO. So, since they do monitor their servers, with all the pings going to US security sites, you think they would pull the plug and investigate? Yeah, one would think. No they sit, watch, and let it continue. Even if the attacks didn't originate from China. They are RESPONSIBLE, because any country with good intentions, especially the one who keeps such tight controls over it's information distribution channels, would put an end to that in a second. You do know that they even block the sites that their citizens can access if they think the site is unacceptable. Kinda like AOL will shut down your account in a second when a mass mailer hacks it and starts sendig out e-mails. Hmmm...Yeah, sure, China is completly innocent, even though the attacks skyrocketed from 300 to 75,000, they couldn't stop them. Yet it will block a website, and be knocking on your door next day to haul your butt to jail and ask you why you tried to access that site, all while helping themselfs out to your healthy kidney for a transplant (yeah, I have military friends who were in China, their prisoners are mandatory DONORS) INNOCENT I TELL YA. ROFL. CHINA - INNOCENT. SADAM - INNOCENT (nevermind the terrorist training camps, nevermind the mass graves, nevermind the mass executions, nevermind the gassings, nevermind the plans for WMD, just like in Stalin Russia, nevermind that too)

quote:Originally posted by $iLk: Screaming for action against China is Newsmax.com journalism... the same kind that tries to establish terrorist ties to Iraq. (Something that should have been done before committing half a trillion dollars) First of all, I am not screaming for action against China. I said that SO FAR, it looks like China is responsible. I guess that's for another thread, but you saying that Iraq had, nor has any ties to terrorists? So Sadam didn't meet with Al Queda? So there were no terrorists in Iraq? Maybe there aren't any terrorists there right now too huh?

Still stands. As long as it's Chinese servers, the EVIDENCE, because we KNOW that it's Chinese servers, that IS evidence, it's called a LEAD points to CHINA. So WE DO have information, we have information that the attacks came from Chinese servers. Yes it can be anyone, anywhere. SO FAR however, the LEAD points to CHINA. COME ON man, how else can I put this. If the lead points to china, that's where you look, you don't go off looking in Australia. Now here's where you are right, we don't have enough information as far as to say exactly from which computer it was done and where that computer was located, but the EVIDENCE leads to Chinese servers, from there it might go to anywhere in the world, but SO FAR IT IS CHINA that it points to. Therefore, if you were asked, can Britain be responsible for this? Your answer would be no, because it has no FACTS to it. If you were asked if Canada was responsible, NO - YOU HAVE NO FACTS TO IT, if you were asked IF CHINA COULD BE RESPONSIBLE, THE ANSWER WOULD BE - YES, WE HAVE A LEAD WHICH SAYS THAT IT COULD BE THEM. See how simple, right NOW, China is the ONLY country that COULD be it. Is it really that hard or am I not saying something right?

My points still stand. ---Israel provided them with FREE water and electricity. ---Israel provided them with jobs to pay for their food and living expenses. ---Israel closed the border where terrorists are caught, while Palestinians say that if they open the border, no terrorists will cross. ---Israel pulls out, leaves the land to Palestine to do what they want, Palestine starts complaining that now there's no jobs. Blaming Israel, ANOTHER COUNTRY, because now there's no jobs available for THEM. That's like US closing down the border with Mexico and Mexicans complaining that the they can't support their families and it's US fault, NOT THEIR MEXICAN GOVERMNETS. In that case I blame French for high inflation, low wages, and that storm recking havoc in Florida, it's their fault for not protecting world economy, giving all people fair wage so that they can live however comfortably they want, and not dissipating that storm over Florida, I don't care how they do it, but they HAVE TO. Just like Palestinians don't care how Israel should protect itself against terrorists as long as they themselfs get their paychecks and just like Mexicans don't care if it's illegal to cross the border into another country without permission, as long as they get to. Those points are ALL valid. And like it's been said before, give them an inch they will want a yeard. They wanted Israel to leave, they did. Not they $#@%itch that Israel is not PROVIDING for them after leaving. Here's a CLUE, IT'S YOUR LAND NOW, EITHER OPEN UP YOUR OWN BUSINESSES, FARM YOUR OWN LAND, PROVIDE FOR YOURSELF, OR BE A SOCIALIST AND DEMAND THOSE THINGS FROM YOUR PALESTINIAN GOVERNMENT. You can't blaim Israel anymore, BUZZ OFF.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...&sn=001&sc=1000 So, Israeli leave Gaza, and what happens? Now they scream how bad life is. While Israelis "occupied" Gaza, they provided Paliestinians with FREE ELECTRICITY AND WATER. "It was enough, Abumansi said, to pay for food the family bought to supplement the U.N. food distributions every two months. And while it was not enough to pay the bills for water and electricity -- provided by Israel -- so many Gaza residents were in the same position that their power never shut off. "They would have to shut down all of Gaza," he said." ---Interesting how Africa is in the same spot, AFTER the British businesses pulled out because African leaders kept yelling "Get out from where you don't belong" <---sounds familiar?, has been and STILL is for YEARS. "A lot of people are responsible for his dilemma, Abumansi said. There is the Palestinian Authority, which he feels has done too little to help the people of Gaza. The closest they came so to helping him directly, he said, was when they gave out 100-shekel notes to voters on election day." ---What a fair election that must be. Now remind me who has the money? Isn't it the same people who build hospitals and schools? Isn't their name Hamas? Aren't they a terrorist organization? So Whoever hands out the money, gets the votes. Wow, I guess terrorists ARE running Palestine. "Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has promised large-scale development in the wake of Israel's disengagement and has said he looks forward to the day when no Palestinian will work outside of Palestinian land. ABUMANSI SNORTS AT THE IDEA OF AN ECONOMIC DIVORCE FROM THE JEWISH STATE. " ---I bet Israel is looking for that very same day. But at least SOME Palestinians know the reality of things, like this Abumansi guy. He knows that when Palestine develops Gaza, is the day when Africa won't need aid, and pigs will grow wings. "Give me a job, and I will talk like them," he said, sarcasm in his voice. " ""If Israel opens its doors for the workers, no suicide bombers will come through, but if it keeps it closed, then operations will happen," he said. ---Now that statement is an oxymoron. If Israel opens the borders then no suicide bombers will come through? Hmm. I guess that would be just like this.... "On June 19, a 21-year-old Palestinian woman was caught at the Erez crossing wearing explosives under her clothing. Investigators said she planned to detonate herself inside a Beersheba hospital. Israeli officials closed the crossing immediately -- and it has remained closed ever since. " ---Wonder why it has remained CLOSED. Didn't she try to go through EXACTLY BECAUSE THE BORDER WAS OPEN? Maybe they should re-open it, so that NO TERRORIST WILL GO THROUGH, AGAIN. ""I just want to work. Let them open the doors for us, and thousands will go there and work," he said. "I'm ready to stand in line at 10 o'clock in the morning." ---How many Israeli workers would need those thousands of job then?