you are a blind man after reading and listening to 2 much bullshit.
Bush's Policy Change Angers Palestinians
- Thread starter Copernicus
- Start date
you are a blind man after reading and listening to 2 much bullshit.
1) Ok, you make it clear why you believe that the international bodies, other countries and International Law is unfair to Israel. Could you then describe whose judgement/ruling would you accept as impartial? If such a body does not exist, could you describe how you would create it?
2) Let's not talk about the WWII, please. Where did you get this: "Majorities of people in Eastern Europe were eager to kill and support the Nazis insofar as their cleansing of the Jews. "
3) Examples of twisting words, facts and fancy command of language:
3.1) "As far as settlements, first keep in mind that settlements can be dismantled. "
Indeed they can be, but Israel just made it very clear that it wants to keep the 6 of them in the West Bank forever and keep them growing.
3.2) "As far as your describing the use of terms for the occupation, that is a moot point that should've been addressed in the earlier part of your paragraph (ie why EU, Russia, etc support Arabs), since it is obviously related to the different way the situations are viewed. And for that reason, I addressed it in the paragraph above."
This does not say anything and sounds like legalese to me.
3.3) "As far as why Israel does not simply use "its own land" for the wall, I addressed this. First, the land you consider to be not Israel's is largely in dispute. "
It is not in dispute. The occupation is illegal under International Law. Forget the UN if you wish, the law is still the law, is it not?
3.4) "With regard to the road map, the road map never started because the PA never clamped down on terrorism. "
What do you say to those that say that the road map never started, because Israel continued building the settlements?
2) Let's not talk about the WWII, please. Where did you get this: "Majorities of people in Eastern Europe were eager to kill and support the Nazis insofar as their cleansing of the Jews. "
3) Examples of twisting words, facts and fancy command of language:
3.1) "As far as settlements, first keep in mind that settlements can be dismantled. "
Indeed they can be, but Israel just made it very clear that it wants to keep the 6 of them in the West Bank forever and keep them growing.
3.2) "As far as your describing the use of terms for the occupation, that is a moot point that should've been addressed in the earlier part of your paragraph (ie why EU, Russia, etc support Arabs), since it is obviously related to the different way the situations are viewed. And for that reason, I addressed it in the paragraph above."
This does not say anything and sounds like legalese to me.
3.3) "As far as why Israel does not simply use "its own land" for the wall, I addressed this. First, the land you consider to be not Israel's is largely in dispute. "
It is not in dispute. The occupation is illegal under International Law. Forget the UN if you wish, the law is still the law, is it not?
3.4) "With regard to the road map, the road map never started because the PA never clamped down on terrorism. "
What do you say to those that say that the road map never started, because Israel continued building the settlements?
Quote from I Missed Boat:
Referring to Russia invading Afghanistan is completely irrelevant. I'm saying that Russia persecuted Russian Jews for centuries. In much of that time, Jews weren't even allowed citizenship. So I'm not rushing to "oppression of Jews" stuff. You ask why Russia is not friendly to Israel, and aside from their interest in oil and placating their own large Muslim population, it is funny you would refer to a country that until very recently heavily persecuted its own Jews. Also, you are stretching things mightily when you claim that I was implying Israel has a monopoly on truth and right. Politics is politics, and are you suggesting that most countries don't do what is in their national interest? Backing Arabs is, for the most part, in the interests of most governments for the political reasons previously described. And are you suggesting that anti-semitism doesn't and hasn't existed? In Europe the hatred, lies and bigotry of Jews went well beyond the Nazis. Majorities of people in Eastern Europe were eager to kill and support the Nazis insofar as their cleansing of the Jews. Recent polls in Austria even show that a majority of Austrians hate Jews and believe, like so many Arabs, the most extreme lies about them. And this bigotry exists in many places where there are no Jews are hardly any Jews. So when a politicized and corrupt world body holds more special sessions on Israel than any other country, investigates Israel more than any other country, holds Israel to double standards, and allows conferences on racism and human rights to be hijacked and made exclusively about Israel, all the while so many millions have died around the world in mass murders and ethnic cleansings, and slavery persists to this day, please don't ask me why Israel doesn't always value the UN when it worries about its survival.
Wow, thank you. You're the first person who suggested I have a great command of the language. Darkhorse must be laughing right now!
But please do describe how I twisted words and facts, at least with one or two examples. Don't just say its so. I absolutely contend that I never twisted any words or facts!
Sorry if I did this, and I never accused you of being a bigot or particularly harsh in your views (unlike some others here who were very clear in this manner). But I did not understand why you were calling my point irrelevant when I addressed one of your sources for proof (UN), and I did not understand why you were repeating yourself and not addressing my responses. I apologize if I offended!
FredBloggs
Guest
Personally, I think the world would be a much nicer place if we drove the tanks through Israel and kicked their Govt out.
This would achieve 2 things:
We would be on much better terms with Arab states, thus securing lower oil prices and a higher standard of living globally
We would not have such a huge threat of terrorism over our heads.
A TRUTH THAT CANNOT BE DENIED! But some one will try!
This would achieve 2 things:
We would be on much better terms with Arab states, thus securing lower oil prices and a higher standard of living globally
We would not have such a huge threat of terrorism over our heads.
A TRUTH THAT CANNOT BE DENIED! But some one will try!
Funny how you jump on a previous post to say I twist things. Yet not one example has been given. Saying it more than once doesn't make it true. And I call you a bigot cause you said stupid, bigoted things in previous posts. Don't try to whine again as though you're being labeled over your "differences" with Israel. I'm not about to go over all your posts this minute (I'm actually trying to trade, not that I'm doing a good job of it while posting at the same time), but among the ignorant things you said was the one I just described, claiming that Jews invite persecution for claiming to be a "chosen people." Nevermind that every religion thinks its right, and many Christian denominations and Muslims are so intolerant they think God won't accept and allow into heaven non-believers (and muslim extremists even claim that non-believers should be killed). And, once again jumping on someone else's bandwagon, when did I claim a moral high ground? If anyone is claiming a moral highground, it is you! Think about what you actually say before you say it!
It is not a truth, it can be denied, and many people already have successfully done so. You are the one who is trying. Other people make arguments with examples and evidence, and you just keep repeating opinions without anything to support them.
it's not an issue of believing oneself right, it's an issue of believing others wrong. the only two major religions on this planet that have a "my way or the highway" tenet as part of their belief system are christianity and islam. take your pick of hinduism, buddhism, judaism, taoism, confucism etc etc etc - none make a claim to being the exclusive path of righteousness.
both christianity and islam have a tendency towards fundamentalism that is in no small part responsible for the current situation. BOTH sides are to blame.
How about reason?? And what body did Russia listen to as it has harshly cracked down on Chechnya? Where's the world outcry? And what world body has Sudan listened to as the Arab descendent government hires Arab militias to help them massacre and enslave the Christians and animists in the South. Where's the worldwide outcry (I hear only whimpers). The UN says and investigates little while terrible things happen (or harsh crackdowns in the case of Russia), but beats the drums when Israel simply tries to defend itself.
And meanwhile, all these other countries ignore what few resolutions there are relating to their states, but its only a problem when Israel, the most politicized subject of the UN, worries more about survival than always trying to placate the UN and world politics.
Read Eichman in Jerusalem, although there are obviously tons of facts and other sources.
Israel was also willing to give up the settlements only a few years ago, and in exchange for a true peace, most Israelis would happily give them up. No twisting going on!
You stated the following: "And as far as the occupation not being illegal - I think Israel is the only country in the world the calls the territories "disputed" and not "occupied"."
I was pointing out that this was an erroneous argument, and that it was really part of the argument you were making in the 1st paragraph, so it shouldn't have been made a separate argument in a third paragraph. No legalese. No twisting going on!
What law?? It is in dispute. No twisting, no "fancy command of language."
Because Israel has gone that route before. They gave concessions, only to have the PA lie and return to terrorism on a large scale (since they were keeping up terrorism on a lesser scale all those years). And why should Israel start when the PA hasn't even shown the tiniest hint of being willing to stop supporting terrorism (let alone to start curbing it). No fancy command of language. No twisting!
1) Here you go again. I asked the following question:
"Could you then describe whose judgement/ruling would you accept as impartial? If such a body does not exist, could you describe how you would create it?"
And your response is "reason"?!
Whose reason??
Further, you go on to saying that as long as others violate the law so can Israel. That is pretty laim. Leaving my question un-answered.
2) "Israel was also willing to give up the settlements only a few years ago, and in exchange for a true peace, most Israelis would happily give them up. No twisting going on!"
The road map called for it, Israel agreed to the road map. Yet, the expansion of the settlements was not halted. That is the relevant fact here. Not what happened "a few years ago".
Also, notice that I am not even talking about dismantling of the settlements here; Israel was unwilling to even stop the expansion!
3) "Because Israel has gone that route before. They gave concessions, only to have the PA lie and return to terrorism on a large scale (since they were keeping up terrorism on a lesser scale all those years). And why should Israel start when the PA hasn't even shown the tiniest hint of being willing to stop supporting terrorism (let alone to start curbing it). No fancy command of language. No twisting!"
Same response as before.
4) Anyway, it was nice chatting with you. Good luck with the thread and trading.
"Could you then describe whose judgement/ruling would you accept as impartial? If such a body does not exist, could you describe how you would create it?"
And your response is "reason"?!
Whose reason??
Further, you go on to saying that as long as others violate the law so can Israel. That is pretty laim. Leaving my question un-answered.
2) "Israel was also willing to give up the settlements only a few years ago, and in exchange for a true peace, most Israelis would happily give them up. No twisting going on!"
The road map called for it, Israel agreed to the road map. Yet, the expansion of the settlements was not halted. That is the relevant fact here. Not what happened "a few years ago".
Also, notice that I am not even talking about dismantling of the settlements here; Israel was unwilling to even stop the expansion!
3) "Because Israel has gone that route before. They gave concessions, only to have the PA lie and return to terrorism on a large scale (since they were keeping up terrorism on a lesser scale all those years). And why should Israel start when the PA hasn't even shown the tiniest hint of being willing to stop supporting terrorism (let alone to start curbing it). No fancy command of language. No twisting!"
Same response as before.
4) Anyway, it was nice chatting with you. Good luck with the thread and trading.