RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

LTRsubNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 5:27:56 PM)

Fascinating stuff.

I have a friend who is so drenched in world history, he's a literal encyclopedia and he could debate all of you, some he'd agree with, others he'd laugh at.  I wish I had the guts to show him this website, just so I could hear his comments.

I for one don't know enough to comment on this topic but I sure am glad for those who do...'cause I'm learning a lot!



EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 5:38:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cr0ckdile

EnglishDomNW, you keep reiterating the same point about "a large number of Jews" who oppose the existence of the state of Israel.  Why is it then that the largest Jewish organizations in the world are Zionist?  The organization you keep making references to is a tiny sect within Orthodox Judaism (which is the smallest denomination within Judaism) that rejects the state until the time of the Messiah.  Otherwise, the vast number of Jews, including most of the Orthodox community, supports the state's existence.



It's simple.  If I post my dislike of the (supposed) state of Israel, it's invariably met by accusations of anti-semitism.  Since many (a word you obviously take issue with as a supporter of Israel) True Torah Jews don't support Israel, I can only be as anti-Semitic as they are, i.e. not at all.  One of the over-riding favourite lines of debating attack from unqualified Israel supporters is to lean back on the Holocaust and somehow believe that in itself is justification for the arguments for.

I suggest you read the Zionists role in the Holocaust and see for yourself why I would refute that claim before it reached a full stop.

Since you take issue with True Torah Jews on the issue of Israel cr0ckdile, perhaps you can show me where God Himself had a hand in the current setting up of the state of Israel?

If you can't, then I suggest you agree with me that religiously at any means, Israel has no right to exist.



cr0ckdile -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 5:50:53 PM)

EnglishDomNW,

What's worse than pro-Israel folks calling critics of Israel "anti-Semitic," is anti-Israel folks who, any time their argument is countered, tell their opponents to stop calling them "anti-Semitic."

Show me where in my last post I called you an anti-Semite or referred to the Holocaust?

I'm an atheist and I couldn't care less if self-proclaimed "True Torah" Jews think there is a self-conscious, free-willed, invisible being in the sky who is going to send a messenger to save mankind from original sin, and that until then, Israel cant exist.  When you throw mysticism into the bargain, anything goes.  Fact is, most of the Orthodox community does support Israel.  But that's also irrelevant to me.  Israel is there, Israel is a freer society than any of its neighbours, and that alone gives it greater justification in asserting its security.



EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 6:01:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cr0ckdile

EnglishDomNW,

What's worse than pro-Israel folks calling critics of Israel "anti-Semitic," is anti-Israel folks who, any time their argument is countered, tell their opponents to stop calling them "anti-Semitic."

Show me where in my last post I called you an anti-Semite or referred to the Holocaust?


You didn't, anywhere - show me where I was claiming you did.
quote:



I'm an atheist and I couldn't care less if self-proclaimed "True Torah" Jews think there is a self-conscious, free-willed, invisible being in the sky who is going to send a messenger to save mankind from original sin, and that until then, Israel cant exist. 


Then why bring up an anti argument about True Torah Jews?  If the Torah declares that God - and only God - will lead Jews back to their promised land, then anyone making a claim for Israel that it religiously belongs to God's people can't possibly be true in Israel's current state.  I'm an atheist myself, the point is simply that if someone lays claim to Israel's right to exist based on religion, then they should learn that that very religion BANS Israel from existing until their God leads them back there, that's all.
quote:


When you throw mysticism into the bargain, anything goes.  Fact is, most of the Orthodox community does support Israel. 


Really?  What's your source?

quote:



But that's also irrelevant to me.  Israel is there, Israel is a freer society than any of its neighbours, and that alone gives it greater justification in asserting its security.



Does it indeed.  So because one nation is more free than another they can simply take over the less free nation and declare it theirs?  Which international law did you get that from?



cr0ckdile -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 6:12:03 PM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: cr0ckdile

EnglishDomNW,

What's worse than pro-Israel folks calling critics of Israel "anti-Semitic," is anti-Israel folks who, any time their argument is countered, tell their opponents to stop calling them "anti-Semitic."

Show me where in my last post I called you an anti-Semite or referred to the Holocaust?

You didn't, anywhere - I wasn't claiming you did.


Then why bring it up, if not to attempt to discredit my argument with your usual, "Stop calling me an anti-Semite!"

quote:

Then why bring up an anti argument about True Torah Jews?  If the Torah declares that God - and only God - will lead Jews back to their promised land, then anyone making a claim for Israel that it religiously belongs to God's people can't possibly be true in Israel's current state.  I'm an atheist myself, the point is simply that if someone lays claim to Israel's right to exist based on religion, then they should learn that that very religion BANS Israel from existing until their God leads them back there, that's all.


You brought religion into this.  Religion is not independent of its followers.  Orthodox Judaism is divided into two major groups, Hasidic and Lithuanian.  Chabad is the largest denomination within the former, Aish HaTorah within the latter.  Check out their websites.

But who laid claim to Israel's right to exist based on religion?  I didn't, and you can rest assured most Israelis do not, as Israel is one of the most secular societies in the world.  Not only was the founder of the Zionist movement an atheist, but most of the early settlers were as well.

quote:

So because one nation is more free than another they can simply take over the less free nation and declare it theirs?  Which international law did you get that from?


I don't take it from International Law, I take it from my own judgements.  And I would be happy to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of Internation Law with you.





EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 6:25:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cr0ckdile


quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: cr0ckdile

EnglishDomNW,

What's worse than pro-Israel folks calling critics of Israel "anti-Semitic," is anti-Israel folks who, any time their argument is countered, tell their opponents to stop calling them "anti-Semitic."

Show me where in my last post I called you an anti-Semite or referred to the Holocaust?


You didn't, anywhere - I wasn't claiming you did.


Then why bring it up, if not to attempt to discredit my argument with your usual, "Stop calling me an anti-Semite!"



Reading back, what I see is "  One of the over-riding favourite lines of debating attack from unqualified Israel supporters is to lean back on the Holocaust and somehow believe that in itself is justification for the arguments for."
If you can see the name "cr0ckdile" anywhere in that sentence, could you highlight it for me ?


quote:

Then why bring up an anti argument about True Torah Jews?  If the Torah declares that God - and only God - will lead Jews back to their promised land, then anyone making a claim for Israel that it religiously belongs to God's people can't possibly be true in Israel's current state.  I'm an atheist myself, the point is simply that if someone lays claim to Israel's right to exist based on religion, then they should learn that that very religion BANS Israel from existing until their God leads them back there, that's all.

You brought religion into this.

Indeed I did.  So why argue a point against it by saying "I'm an atheist that doesn't care what the Jewish religion states"?  I was simply pointing out that if anyone DID use that as an argument for Israel's existence - and the internet is full of message boards of people claiming exactly that - then they needed to be challenged on such thinking.  Because it's clearly wrong.  And since you offered no defence against it, I take it you don't disagree.
quote:


Religion is not independent of its followers.  Orthodox Judaism is divided into two major groups, Hasidic and Lithuanian.  Chabad is the largest denomination within the former, Aish HaTorah within the latter.  Check out their websites.

But who laid claim to Israel's right to exist based on religion?  I didn't


Then why are you commenting on it at all?  It's a simple point.  The Torah says Israel cannot exist until God leads His people back there.  You failed to show me where He did, therefore as I originally stated, you presumably agree that under their own religion, Israel has no right to exist.  How much more straightforward can it be?

If you don't like the idea of debating the legitmacy of Israel's existence based on religion, why respond to a posting that addresses that exact point?
quote:


and you can rest assured most Israelis do not, as Israel is one of the most secular societies in the world.  Not only was the founder of the Zionist movement an atheist, but most of the early settlers were as well.

quote:

So because one nation is more free than another they can simply take over the less free nation and declare it theirs?  Which international law did you get that from?


I don't take it from International Law, I take it from my own judgements.  And I would be happy to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of Internation Law with you.




I think it's a fair assessment to say "The Judgements of cr0ckdile on CollarMe.com" don't really hold an awful lot of sway in the arena of world politics.



Alumbrado -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 9:50:18 PM)

quote:

I think it's a fair assessment to say "The Judgements of cr0ckdile on CollarMe.com" don't really hold an awful lot of sway in the arena of world politics.


But those of Rabbi Teitelbaum do?[8|]

Just out of curiousity, does Hezbollah say it specifically only wants to kill Zionists, or only the observant Jewish members of a synagogue? 

Or is the current violence based on the stated goal of killing all Jews based on bloodline, not dogma?

Because if this isn't a strictly doctrinal religious conflict, that would make the haggling over the finer points of Torah a ...what?

Oh yeah....

'So it don't vheeestle'.[:D]



meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 10:14:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

MC,
Only because I respect your position, I want to pose the same question to you that I posed to another. The first invasion created terrorists, and leaving the area obviously created more terrorists. How is going back now creating more or less? In this case you have examples of Israeli occupation and Israeli abandonment. In both cases there was no peace. The argument that the current activity is creating more terrorists seems very weak against history. Besides, more or less, only rationalizes genocide if regardless of the response more enemies are created.



The problem in the middle east doesn't come down solely to Israel which I've been trying to say but which has largely been missed or maybe I have just been bad at puttting across my point. Ever since the fall of the Ottoman Empire the Arabs have suffered western meddling and neo-colonialism, mainly because of oil, Israel is just a part of that. There are many legitimate grievances held by the Arabs and each terrorist group has sprung up for different reasons and form loose alliances, using Israel and the Palestinians as a focal point. All the major western powers are guilty, first the British and French, then the USA. It's only by trying to address legitimate grievances wll there ever be peace there and addressing legitimate grievances doesn't mean the destruction of Israel. I accpet that the Arabs have to take a good look at themselves and many Arabs are willing to but moderate Arabs are prevented from imposing their vision of the middle east because they are constantly undermined by the west and Israel. Take the case in point. Israel's current over reaction has weakened moderate Arabs and strengthened the hand of extremists. It is only by the west accepting their part in undermining moderate Arabs and putting into action policies that strengthen moderate Arabs will the moderates gain the upper hand and the west will get the middle east it desires. Forward looking, modern democratic states that can accept Israel in thie midst.

The Lebanese civil war was a direct result of destablisation caused through the Palestian expulsions by Israel. Hezzbollah was created by the last Israeli occupation of Lebanon. It is a lot easier to create terrorist organisations than defeating them. Hezzbollah, is not so much a terrorist organisation as a Lebanese resistance movement full of fighters who still see Israel's hand in the destruction of Lebanon in the original Lebanese civil war. Only time and effort and proving to the Lebanese that it doesn't need resistance fighters will democracy be brought about. Democracy was making progress in Lebanon until the unfortunate demise (ironically) of Sharon. We now have a new Israeli Prime minister who obviously feels the need to prove he is a hard man and it is his policies (backed by Bush) that have taken the whole region back twenty years.



WhipTheHip -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 10:41:59 PM)

Israel's over-reaction?   Over-reaction is how Arabs reacted to the Danish cartoons of Muhammed.  If someone kills several memabers of your family and kidnaps a member of your family would you over-react?   Lebanon allowed Hezbollah to operate in their country, and terrorize Israeli citizens.    If  some country attacks my country or allows others on its land to attack my country, I will respond with disproportionate force every time.  In the real world, if someone attacks your family with a knife, you have every right to blow them to pieces.  Since there are 1,000
arabs for every Jew, Israel would have to kill 1000 arabs to keep things proportional.    If it was man-for-man,
every Jew in Isreael would be dead,



meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/3/2006 10:56:41 PM)

Arabs and Jews are the same semetic people, just different religions. This conflict originates in taking someone elses land by force and the reason the conflict has carried on. Read Gurion and Begin and the rest of the terrorists that set up Israel. They are quite candid and open about what they did and don't accuse the Palestinians of being terrorists but understand why the Palestinians hate them.



EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/4/2006 4:42:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhipTheHip

Israel's over-reaction?   Over-reaction is how Arabs reacted to the Danish cartoons of Muhammed.  If someone kills several memabers of your family and kidnaps a member of your family would you over-react? 

 
So, by your logic, the 700 or so Lebanese that have died in Israel's attacks should now over-react by killing 2,000 Israelis?
 
And when they do, those 2,000 Israelis families kill 5,000 Lebanese?
 
Almost a third of the dead in Lebanon so far have been children under 12.  You're suggesting a problem rather than an answer
 
quote:
 
  Lebanon allowed Hezbollah to operate in their country, and terrorize Israeli citizens.    If  some country attacks my country or allows others on its land to attack my country, I will respond with disproportionate force every time. 

 
Does this mean Hezbollah should again over-react and disproportionately attack Israel since it's now Israeli soldiers who are in Lebanon?



ddm -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/4/2006 4:09:45 PM)

The Jews aren't the only race to have a history that links divinity to land. Even the Romans and Greeks had founders or gods whose mythologies were linked to Athens, Alba Longa, Sparta e.t.c.
How long do you wish the Jews to reside in Israel till their presence becomes legitimate? Surely 3000 years must carry some weight when you consider they're still excavating monuments from the times of Solomon and King David.
Islamic clerics say Jerusalem is Islamic but Islam only appeared around 600 A.D., some 600 years after Christianity.
It seems to me Jews have a very legitimate claim on the territory of Israel but Aboriginees also have a claim on Australia as they were there a long time too.
At any rate, I agree there should be a Palestinian State but if the Palestinians refuse to compromise and follow the peace plan, there is no option but to use the military to resolve the issue. I think it's time Israel took the gloves off.



ddm -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/4/2006 4:19:33 PM)

Jews didn't ethically cleanse Arabs. Arabs ethnically cleansed Jews throughout history. The invasions of Babylon and Assyria are testimony to that.
Finally, the emperor Hadrian crushed seditious Jews after they resisted his wish to make Jerusalem a pagan city. Jews were then banned from entering Jerusalem except one day a year to mourn and weep at the wall. Half a million were massacred.
The Palestinians never would have occupied Gaza if it hadn't been for the fact Jews had been driven out. The Palestinian people, I believe, are a mixed race of immigrants who converted to Islam at a later date.
This is a case of the weaker man being driven out of his house by a bully. In his absence, squatters take up refuge and claim rights to the house. However, the weak man arms himself again and forces his way back into the house now he's in a position of power again.
The squatters claim this is unfair. The solution? Legaly the squatter have rights but who can deny the oriignal householder doesn't have rights after the bully kicked hi out?



ddm -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/4/2006 4:26:16 PM)

It was after this historical event that Palestinians began to settle in lands we now know as Gaza. It is one example of a people being ethnically cleansed and modern Israel has a lot to do with undoing the historical wrongs of ethnic cleansing:
"After the end of this first revolt, Jews continued to live in Jerusalem in significant numbers, and were allowed to practice their religion. In the second century, the Roman Emperor Hadrian began to rebuild Jerusalem as a pagan city while restricting some Jewish practices. Angry at this affront, the Judeans again revolted, led by Simon Bar Kokhba. Hadrian responded with overwhelming force, putting down the revolution, killing as many as a half million Jews, and resettling the city as a pagan polis under the name Aelia Capitolina. Jews were forbidden to enter the city but for a single day of the year, Tisha B'Av, (the Ninth of Av, see Hebrew calendar), when they could weep for the destruction of their city at the Temple's only remaining wall."






amastermind -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/7/2006 5:05:26 PM)

EnglishDomNW

Maybe you suffer from being called an antisemite because you are one.  I would call you one based on your post #317 and subtly on other posts.  There are several forms of antisemitism.  One of them is dismissing legitimate arguments as those of Jews, or Jewish run media.  In its extreme form, in Nazi germany, Einstein's Theory of Relativity was stamped officially as Jew Science.  You compound the problem by calling your rubbish (Jewish run media) a countering argument.  Moreover, none of your other "arguments " stand up to anything other than double standards based on arbitrary prejudices.

I will give you three justifications for the Jewish State.  Certainly one of them should fit into your religious, political, or philosophical views.

1)  (I doubt this one will)  God promised the land of Israel to the Jews.  Whether you believe this or not, or in religion or not, or God or not, there are millions of Jews and Christians who do.  They are not part of a "Jewish run media", nor are they extremists.  Nor is there opinion on the State of Israel or any number of other issues unreasonable. 

2)  A softened version.  Jews are a legitimate ethnicity and every ethnicity is entitled to its homeland.  Israel is the natural place for this homeland based on religion and history.   If you accept that there are ethnicities in the world, and if Jews constitute an ethnic group, then, the justification for Israel follows.

3)  If you accept International Law, then ,note that International Law accepts Israel's right to exist.

4)  Israel has a right to exist because it says it does.  Jews settled Israel, many sneaking through the back door under a British mandate that greatly restricted immigration of Jews even during the Halocaust.  The War of Independence in 1948 gave Israel its right to exist. The situation is no different than the founding of the United States in the late 18th century or when England fought against the Celts or whomever 600 or so years ago.  From an athiestic, Machiavelian view of the world, Israel has a right to exist because it won its War of Independence. 

What I am saying (not so subtly) is that England (or any other country for that matter) has no more of a right to exist than does Israel.  Your failure to see this can only come from prejudice or from a communist world view in that no country has a right to exist.  However, you do not say that no country has a right to exist, only that Israel doesn't.  Maybe that is why you suffer from the antisemite label. 

But in truth, Israel's right to exist is completely independent of your opinions, however poorly thought out they are.





EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/7/2006 7:31:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: amastermind

EnglishDomNW

Maybe you suffer from being called an antisemite because you are one.


LOL at last, someone called me an anti-Semite.  How long did I have to wait for THAT little line to finally surface.

quote:




I would call you one based on your post #317 and subtly on other posts.  There are several forms of antisemitism.  One of them is dismissing legitimate arguments as those of Jews, or Jewish run media.  In its extreme form, in Nazi germany, Einstein's Theory of Relativity was stamped officially as Jew Science.  You compound the problem by calling your rubbish (Jewish run media) a countering argument. 


I'm just going to let you keep going while I have a cigarette, keep typing

quote:




Moreover, none of your other "arguments " stand up to anything other than double standards based on arbitrary prejudices.



Really?  Which ones are you referring to ?

quote:



I will give you three justifications for the Jewish State.  Certainly one of them should fit into your religious, political, or philosophical views.



ok, let me put my feet up

quote:



1)  (I doubt this one will)  God promised the land of Israel to the Jews.  Whether you believe this or not, or in religion or not, or God or not, there are millions of Jews and Christians who do.


I've never made a secret of the fact I believe it wholeheartedly.  What I stated was that God Himself will lead the Jews back to Israel, not the Zionists.  I'd certainly be grateful if you'd concentrate on what I say, not what you wish I'd said to make your point more legitimate.

I'd be even more grateful if you could show me - in detail - where God led the Jews back to Israel.  Because I don't think you can.  Zionists, yes.  God, no.  And since Jews are under a very grave prohibition from God of setting up the state of Israel until such a time as they are led back there, I'd say your religion argument was desperately close to being weak.

quote:



They are not part of a "Jewish run media", nor are they extremists.  Nor is there opinion on the State of Israel or any number of other issues unreasonable. 



Again, this has already been explained.  It didn't even attempt to label "all media as Jewish", it simply pointed out "that section of the media that happens to have a Jewish owner (and there are many sections of American media that do) and therefore more likely to support Israel.  But do carry on....

quote:



2)  A softened version.  Jews are a legitimate ethnicity and every ethnicity is entitled to its homeland


Now this seems to be contradicting your own point 1).  Since under the Jewish religion, God expelled Jews from Israel, you can't have it both ways.

quote:



.  Israel is the natural place for this homeland based on religion and history.



Again you make the mistake of relying on religion as a reason, when the very existence of Israel as it stands today is in direct defiance of God.

quote:


If you accept that there are ethnicities in the world, and if Jews constitute an ethnic group, then, the justification for Israel follows.


Being in possession of an ethnicity is a pretty weak argument for ownership of a nation.

quote:


3)  If you accept International Law, then ,note that International Law accepts Israel's right to exist.



So it's not religion then. 

quote:


4)  Israel has a right to exist because it says it does.  Jews settled Israel, many sneaking through the back door under a British mandate that greatly restricted immigration of Jews even during the Halocaust.


Truly you do not want to defend a Zionist by using the Holocaust as an example.  That really WOULD be a mistake.

quote:


The War of Independence in 1948 gave Israel its right to exist. The situation is no different than the founding of the United States in the late 18th century or when England fought against the Celts or whomever 600 or so years ago.  From an athiestic, Machiavelian view of the world, Israel has a right to exist because it won its War of Independence. 



Someone must have told you that war is over

quote:



What I am saying (not so subtly) is that England (or any other country for that matter) has no more of a right to exist than does Israel. 



Oh but it does. 
quote:



Your failure to see this can only come from prejudice or from a communist world view in that no country has a right to exist.  However, you do not say that no country has a right to exist, only that Israel doesn't. 


Well the thread is about Israel.  We can discuss Nigeria if you like.

quote:


Maybe that is why you suffer from the antisemite label. 



No, I suffer from an anti-semite label because people like you NEED to fall back on that phrase, otherwise Israel gets questioned more than you'd like it to be.  It's a very convenient slur aimed at curbing anyone that happens to disagree with Israel as a state and is not better (or wiser) than calling someone a racist because they disapprove of the way an African nation behaves.

Put simply for you, it's a last-resort insult of the poorly informed.

quote:



But in truth, Israel's right to exist is completely independent of your opinions, however poorly thought out they are.



Let me ask you straight.

What I said about religion and the state of Israel is identical to what true Torah Jews say about religion and the state of Israel.  In fact, they would be my source for this entire thread.

So when you declare openly, without question and directly "you are an anti-Semite", you presumably direct the same accusation to the true Torah Jews.

Yes?  No? 

(I thought not)




amastermind -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/7/2006 8:53:29 PM)

EnglishDomNW

I thought of going through each part of your post and rebutting but it really would be a futile exercise.  Indeed, your post makes very little sense, is barely cohesive, is internally inconsistent, and is inconsistent with some of your earlier posts. 

As an example of its incohesiveness, your last question to me implies that I called you an antisemite because you share views of a certain extreme and very small sector of the population (You don't really. You probably don't even know what their views are on any other aspect of life, but you find it convenient to use this one view.)  In fact, if it weren't convenient to your point of view, you probably wouldn't even know those people existed.  Their views certainly don't dominate in any political arena. In fact, basing your arguments on their views is akin to basing the English attitute towards marriage on the behavior of Henry VIII without even knowing anything about  Henry VIII other than the fate of his wives. 

However, I did not call you an antisemite because of this, but rather for your comment about the "jewish run media" as the only retort to the (obvious) observation that the disproportional response argument is stupid.

Even your qualification "that section of the media happens to have a jewish owner (and there are many sections of the American media that do) and therefore more likely to support Israel.",  without examining  the veracity of it, demonstrates nothing other than your antisemetic tendencies.  Your post 317 might as well have said (in fact it did say, but in slightly less vulgar terms) only a Jew disagrees with me.  By the way, is President Bush a member of  or under the influence of the jewish run media? 

Your jibberish Biblical interpretations about the right of the state of existence of Israel is off theme; something not unexpected since you have very little to support your point of view on theme.   Should you have had a better case to make in defense of your point of view, you would have found no need to mention the media at all.



IronBear -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/7/2006 9:38:15 PM)

amastermind,
I backed off from this thread when it became apparant that EnglishDomNW like MstrTiger has a closed mind, can never admit to any arrors or even consider that others have valid views too. Instead he posts lengthy post after post nit picking at every point which doesn't sit well with him from his bunker and when in doubts turns the heat up into catty comments or flames.. It is absolutely pointless to debate the smallest matter including the time of day with people like this. Thet have not evolved sufficiently to agree to disagree but revert to a form of school yard bully boy tacts trying to over power all oposition and have all those left agreeing with them.... Better to just wish them merry poart and ignore them for the rest of the time.. One day if enough do this they will go and find another sand box to play in... 



EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/7/2006 9:43:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: amastermind

EnglishDomNW

I thought of going through each part of your post and rebutting but it really would be a futile exercise. 

I wonder why.

quote:



Indeed, your post makes very little sense, is barely cohesive, is internally inconsistent, and is inconsistent with some of your earlier posts. 


Prove it.

quote:



As an example of its incohesiveness, your last question to me implies that I called you an antisemite because you share views of a certain extreme and very small sector of the population (You don't really. You probably don't even know what their views are on any other aspect of life, but you find it convenient to use this one view.) 


You make accusations based on what you would like to be fact.  That doesn't make it fact, it just makes you rest easier that you make such unfounded and ludicrous accusations.

It's no more legitimate a debating point than asking "When did you stop beating your wife" ?

quote:




In fact, if it weren't convenient to your point of view, you probably wouldn't even know those people existed. 



And you know this how?  Because frankly, your presumptiousness is mildly irritating.  You can point a finger at someone and say "You're anti-Semitic" but it doesn't actually make that person anti-Semitic.  Any more than pointing at an orange and saying it's a banana makes it a bendy yellow fruit.  You've never met me.   You're basing all these accusatory feelings on about 8 postings on an internet message board (and even then you've asserted your own peculiar interpretation on what I said).

quote:




Their views certainly don't dominate in any political arena. In fact, basing your arguments on their views is akin to basing the English attitute towards marriage on the behavior of Henry VIII without even knowing anything about  Henry VIII other than the fate of his wives. 



I'm not basing my views on that particular group - I'm basing it on the Torah.  What are you basing your argument about Israel's religious right to exist on?  I'd love you to answer that but you won't.  In fact, I'll type it again so you can't pretend you didn't see it.


What are you basing your argument about Israel's religious right to exist on?


quote:



However, I did not call you an antisemite because of this, but rather for your comment about the "jewish run media" as the only retort to the (obvious) observation that the disproportional response argument is stupid.


I've explained that comment.  You can keep spewing hate about it and twisting it to fit your own personal agenda all you like but you're back in the land of presumption rather than fact.  Well, where else would you be.

quote:



Even your qualification "that section of the media happens to have a jewish owner (and there are many sections of the American media that do) and therefore more likely to support Israel.",  without examining  the veracity of it, demonstrates nothing other than your antisemetic tendencies. 


What complete nonsense.  See, you think if you keep saying "You're anti-Semitic" long enough, I'll actually become anti-Semitic and you can then say "Aha! See!"
In fact, I'm not even going to defend that accusation because it's as poorly calculated and presumptious as everything else you type.

quote:




Your post 317 might as well have said (in fact it did say, but in slightly less vulgar terms) only a Jew disagrees with me.



Too funny.  Not only presumptious but inventive.  "Might as well have said" ?  Why, because that would make your argument stronger if I had?

Well, here's some news.  I didn't say that.  You did.

quote:




By the way, is President Bush a member of  or under the influence of the jewish run media? 



I've no idea, why don't you come up with a presumption of your own, you do it better than anyone on here.

quote:


Your jibberish Biblical interpretations about the right of the state of existence of Israel is off theme;


Then why are you so determined to spew hate towards me for mentioning it?  If you didn't think there was merit in what I was saying, you'd have dismissed it outright.  Yet here you are, still discussing it.  Why would that be.

quote:



something not unexpected since you have very little to support your point of view on theme.



I'm sorry, I should have realised you know what my "theme" is and I don't.

quote:



Should you have had a better case to make in defense of your point of view, you would have found no need to mention the media at all.



Then refute it with facts.  Instead of presumption, accusation and meaningless sentences about what you THINK I'm saying.  Because you haven't so far.




EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (8/7/2006 9:53:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

amastermind,
I backed off from this thread when it became apparant that EnglishDomNW like MstrTiger has a closed mind, can never admit to any arrors or even consider that others have valid views too. Instead he posts lengthy post after post nit picking at every point which doesn't sit well with him from his bunker and when in doubts turns the heat up into catty comments or flames.. It is absolutely pointless to debate the smallest matter including the time of day with people like this.

Thet have not evolved sufficiently to agree to disagree but revert to a form of school yard bully boy tacts trying to over power all oposition and have all those left agreeing with them.... Better to just wish them merry poart and ignore them for the rest of the time.. One day if enough do this they will go and find another sand box to play in... 


At least I have a point of view and an opinion, IronBear.  If you spent as much time acquiring one rather than juvenile "sandbox" comments, your contribution would be received like an adult.  I don't claim my opinion is right but I don't lower myself into cheap and childish personal insults simply because I'm out of my depth on a particular topic.



Page: <<   < prev  18 19 [20] 21 22   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875