Moderator: Community Team
Symmetry wrote:Funkyterrance wrote:The OP hasn't said anything out of line so yeah it would be a little unjust to intervene with this thread in any way. Just sounds political so far.
I don't know ifs you're being serious, but anyway here' one example of the bigotry. It sort of adds up.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=171190&p=3739791&hilit=GeneralRisk#p3739791
In the context of your saying that so much of Jewish history is about, essentially "being abused", (true, by-the-way), you have to ask if the proper lesson is really to be entirely defensive to the point of becoming an attacker or if, instead a more tolerant view is better.ahunda wrote: I really & honestly have no idea, how you made these connections. Did I say somewhere, that somebody ("the Jews", Israel, I donĀ“t know) had the right to harm someone else ?
In the given context, you are probably meaning the foundation of Israel as an unjustified harm to the Palestinian people again. Yet again: I am not aware to have spoken of that in my earlier posts.
I didnĀ“t say, it was "sick" to debate these issues either. I was saying, that the thought, that Jewish people should have "learned" something from the Holocaust is sick. What do you learn from being killed ? Maybe you should read the lengthy quote in my last post. David Hirsh expressed this very well, in my opinion.
Yesahunda wrote: I did not say, the state of Israel is justified to do whatever it wants, or that its human rights violation are somehow justified by the history of the Holocaust. Putting words in my mouth again.
Yet again, in this very quote of yours, I find the Holocaust reference somewhat inappropriate: Is Israels policy fueled by racial hatred ?
ahunda wrote: Or are we talking about a country in a war-like state for centuries, that on several occasions chose options & hardline policies, that we donĀ“t agree with or even abhor ? Do we really need to compare those policies to the Holocaust and Israel to Nazi Germany, or can we criticise them for their impact on human rights & living conditions of the Palestinians without doing so ?
ahunda wrote:When reading your post, I for one noted, how you tend to mix up the terms "Jews", "the Jews" and "Israel".
saxitoxin wrote:ahunda wrote:When reading your post, I for one noted, how you tend to mix up the terms "Jews", "the Jews" and "Israel".
I don't think Player said anything she intended to be offensive. This is a casual message board and people speak casually and we should give them the benefit of the doubt.
However, generally speaking, you have a salient point. As someone who has called for Israel to be disestablished, I am careful to always refer to the "Zionist problem" and never the "Jewish problem" because Jews are not the problem and are every bit as much victims of Zionism as anyone. To avoid making that mistake, it is best if civilized peoples simply ignore Israel. It can't even be given the courtesy of discussion. British MP George Galloway set a good example at Oxford two weeks ago:
Ray Rider wrote:Actually it's idiotic to refuse to debate with anyone from an entire nation.
Ray Rider wrote:And as a side note, kudos to ahunda for staying civil even when your words were completely misconstrued.
Symmetry wrote:For some reason i suspect you actually did want to get involved.
PLAYER57832 wrote:In the context of your saying that so much of Jewish history is about, essentially "being abused", (true, by-the-way), you have to ask if the proper lesson is really to be entirely defensive to the point of becoming an attacker or if, instead a more tolerant view is better.
We learn from everything.. good and bad. Learning from something doesn't make it a good thing, it means we go on. Often people who have endured terrible things go on to do great things... but sometimes they also turn around and wind up being as bad or worse than those who harmed them.
PLAYER57832 wrote:When it comes to Israel, the discussion tends to get labeled as "anti semitic", becuase there are a large number of Israelie Jews, particularly some in power right now who truly do think that the holocaust and the Bible each give them the right to forcibly oust Palestiniens.. and that any Palestinien anger and hatred is entirely unjustified because God is "no on their side".
PLAYER57832 wrote:Yesahunda wrote: I did not say, the state of Israel is justified to do whatever it wants, or that its human rights violation are somehow justified by the history of the Holocaust. Putting words in my mouth again.
Yet again, in this very quote of yours, I find the Holocaust reference somewhat inappropriate: Is Israels policy fueled by racial hatred ?
PLAYER57832 wrote:We are talking about a nation largely created by refugees of the holocaust and who were essentially allowed to do so without much question because it was seen as an easy way to deal with the "Jewish problem" of the day.... and because at the time, those "Arabs" really did not matter at all.
Funkyterrance wrote:Symmetry wrote:Funkyterrance wrote:The OP hasn't said anything out of line so yeah it would be a little unjust to intervene with this thread in any way. Just sounds political so far.
I don't know ifs you're being serious, but anyway here' one example of the bigotry. It sort of adds up.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=171190&p=3739791&hilit=GeneralRisk#p3739791
Yeah I just meant in this thread so far. If he says anything actually racist it will destroy any credibility so until then, to be fair, I'm just viewing it as a thought exercise and nothing more.
saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:Actually it's idiotic to refuse to debate with anyone from an entire nation.
Inviting a member of the Zetas cartel to a debate on drug policy legitimizes the cartel.
saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:And as a side note, kudos to ahunda for staying civil even when *his words were completely misconstrued.
I think he was speaking to Player, not me.
Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:Actually it's idiotic to refuse to debate with anyone from an entire nation.
Inviting a member of the Zetas cartel to a debate on drug policy legitimizes the cartel.
Some people would say the same about the Palestinians, so if we followed that philosophy, neither side would talk with the other. But is avoiding discourse helpful in any way to resolving the situation?
... it seeks to promote selective listening. The purpose is to constrict the demand for information, not its flow. Although hasbara includes efforts to impede access to information through a wide variety of techniques adapted to new information technologies, it focuses on limiting the receptivity of audiences to information. In this context, hasbara recognizes the control of narrative as a potent weapon. Narrative is an element of rhetoric. It defines context. When successfully imposed, it provides a cognitive filter. Narratives offer a comprehensive framework for connecting and interpreting events. They substantiate āgroup think,ā establishing baselines for conformity and hence for ostracism.
http://www.mepc.org/articles-commentary ... t-strategy
saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:Actually it's idiotic to refuse to debate with anyone from an entire nation.
Inviting a member of the Zetas cartel to a debate on drug policy legitimizes the cartel.
Some people would say the same about the Palestinians, so if we followed that philosophy, neither side would talk with the other. But is avoiding discourse helpful in any way to resolving the situation?
That's a reasonable question.
However, the only satisfactory resolution is the end of Israel. Israel doesn't seem to be interested in participating in a discussion on how to end its existence. And, entertaining a discussion that's not focused on the only satisfactory resolution becomes a tactic that aids Israel by buying it time. So Israel should be ignored like MP Galloway did since any discussion - regardless of one's position - ends up aiding Israel.
Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:Actually it's idiotic to refuse to debate with anyone from an entire nation.
Inviting a member of the Zetas cartel to a debate on drug policy legitimizes the cartel.
Some people would say the same about the Palestinians, so if we followed that philosophy, neither side would talk with the other. But is avoiding discourse helpful in any way to resolving the situation?
That's a reasonable question.
However, the only satisfactory resolution is the end of Israel. Israel doesn't seem to be interested in participating in a discussion on how to end its existence. And, entertaining a discussion that's not focused on the only satisfactory resolution becomes a tactic that aids Israel by buying it time. So Israel should be ignored like MP Galloway did since any discussion - regardless of one's position - ends up aiding Israel.
I'm not sure how you can make that statement in red so shortly after using the blue word above it without seeing the inherent contradiction...ya know Uncle Saxi, I agree with you on a lot of stuff, but on the issues of Israel and the Falklands our views are almost diametrically opposed.
saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:Actually it's idiotic to refuse to debate with anyone from an entire nation.
Inviting a member of the Zetas cartel to a debate on drug policy legitimizes the cartel.
Some people would say the same about the Palestinians, so if we followed that philosophy, neither side would talk with the other. But is avoiding discourse helpful in any way to resolving the situation?
That's a reasonable question.
However, the only satisfactory resolution is the end of Israel. Israel doesn't seem to be interested in participating in a discussion on how to end its existence. And, entertaining a discussion that's not focused on the only satisfactory resolution becomes a tactic that aids Israel by buying it time. So Israel should be ignored like MP Galloway did since any discussion - regardless of one's position - ends up aiding Israel.
Gillipig wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:Actually it's idiotic to refuse to debate with anyone from an entire nation.
Inviting a member of the Zetas cartel to a debate on drug policy legitimizes the cartel.
Some people would say the same about the Palestinians, so if we followed that philosophy, neither side would talk with the other. But is avoiding discourse helpful in any way to resolving the situation?
That's a reasonable question.
However, the only satisfactory resolution is the end of Israel. Israel doesn't seem to be interested in participating in a discussion on how to end its existence. And, entertaining a discussion that's not focused on the only satisfactory resolution becomes a tactic that aids Israel by buying it time. So Israel should be ignored like MP Galloway did since any discussion - regardless of one's position - ends up aiding Israel.
So you'd want to give Israel back to the palestinians? Or do you have some other suggestion? A tiny itty bitty part of me thinks that the palestinians wouldn't treat the Jews in Israel very well if they all of a sudden got control of the country.
Well that's an interesting concept, but I'll improve on it.Lil_SlimShady wrote:Why can't the sacred land of Israel just be moved to Australia? There is plenty of room, warm weather, and the Aussies are chill. Plus, the Jews will be able to do so much less damage to the world if they are surrounded by a body of water. If Britain granted them rights to Palestinian land in the 40's then why cant they just change their mind?
daddy1gringo wrote:So since the Arab neighbors are so concerned that their Palestinian brothers have a homeland, they could give it to them.
saxitoxin wrote:daddy1gringo wrote:So since the Arab neighbors are so concerned that their Palestinian brothers have a homeland, they could give it to them.
That would be fine. Israel will just need to first pay the $300,000,000,000 they owe the Palestinians for buildings, bank accounts and other assets they seized.
But Israel will never be able to pay their debts since their entire annual government budget is only 1/10th of the amount they owe. So, the only solution is to treat the Israeli nation like every deadbeat debtor in the world is treated - posting an eviction notice on the front door. If they don't leave you take them to court, just like you do with every deadbeat. And if they refuse to show up to court, you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
In other words, you can't take this -
- and give someone this -
and say "there, we're even!"
saxitoxin wrote:...you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:daddy1gringo wrote:So since the Arab neighbors are so concerned that their Palestinian brothers have a homeland, they could give it to them.
That would be fine. Israel will just need to first pay the $300,000,000,000 they owe the Palestinians for buildings, bank accounts and other assets they seized.
But Israel will never be able to pay their debts since their entire annual government budget is only 1/10th of the amount they owe. So, the only solution is to treat the Israeli nation like every deadbeat debtor in the world is treated - posting an eviction notice on the front door. If they don't leave you take them to court, just like you do with every deadbeat. And if they refuse to show up to court, you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
In other words, you can't take this -
- and give someone this -
and say "there, we're even!"
Oh, and what about the belongings of the 900,000 Jews who fled or were expelled from neighboring Arab/Muslim nations? Have you factored that in? Where's their compensation from their former homelands?
Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:...you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
You seem to have some pent-up hatred inside, Uncle Saxi.
saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:daddy1gringo wrote:So since the Arab neighbors are so concerned that their Palestinian brothers have a homeland, they could give it to them.
That would be fine. Israel will just need to first pay the $300,000,000,000 they owe the Palestinians for buildings, bank accounts and other assets they seized.
But Israel will never be able to pay their debts since their entire annual government budget is only 1/10th of the amount they owe. So, the only solution is to treat the Israeli nation like every deadbeat debtor in the world is treated - posting an eviction notice on the front door. If they don't leave you take them to court, just like you do with every deadbeat. And if they refuse to show up to court, you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
In other words, you can't take this -
- and give someone this -
and say "there, we're even!"
Oh, and what about the belongings of the 900,000 Jews who fled or were expelled from neighboring Arab/Muslim nations? Have you factored that in? Where's their compensation from their former homelands?
First, the idea of a so-called "Jewish exodus" is a silly narrative by the Zionist so they can have a "but what about ..." line to which to respond to the horror of the Palestinian Holocaust. The very idea of "Jews fleeing" is ridiculous when most Arab states actually prohibited Jewish emigration for several decades until the 1970s. That's a pretty slow "flight."
Second, in most cases no properties were seized even when the landlords voluntarily chose to become absentee landlords and move to the so-called "State of Israel." In Syria, for instance, Arabs who live in properties owned by Jews continue to pay rent to Jews who hold title to those properties even though their landlords have been absentee for 40 years. This is a principle of rule of law and property rights.
saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:...you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
You seem to have some pent-up hatred inside, Uncle Saxi.
Not at all. If you, in Canada, stop paying rent to your landlord, refuse to go to court and refuse to leave when asked, the landlord will show up with the RCMP. If, when the RCMP arrive, you start firing a howitzer at the patrol cars while your cousin flies overhead dropping napalm on the RCMP from a F-16, I can guarantee - in fairly short order - you, too, would be subject to incoming rocket fire or worse.
The Israelis have refused every opportunity to leave. A forcible eviction of the deadbeat debtors is, therefore, justified. Because the Israelis are armed-to-the-teeth, the Palestinians are justified to use more than pepper spray to execute these legal and just eviction proceedings.
an eviction -->
Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Ray Rider wrote:saxitoxin wrote:daddy1gringo wrote:So since the Arab neighbors are so concerned that their Palestinian brothers have a homeland, they could give it to them.
That would be fine. Israel will just need to first pay the $300,000,000,000 they owe the Palestinians for buildings, bank accounts and other assets they seized.
But Israel will never be able to pay their debts since their entire annual government budget is only 1/10th of the amount they owe. So, the only solution is to treat the Israeli nation like every deadbeat debtor in the world is treated - posting an eviction notice on the front door. If they don't leave you take them to court, just like you do with every deadbeat. And if they refuse to show up to court, you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
In other words, you can't take this -
- and give someone this -
and say "there, we're even!"
Oh, and what about the belongings of the 900,000 Jews who fled or were expelled from neighboring Arab/Muslim nations? Have you factored that in? Where's their compensation from their former homelands?
First, the idea of a so-called "Jewish exodus" is a silly narrative by the Zionist so they can have a "but what about ..." line to which to respond to the horror of the Palestinian Holocaust. The very idea of "Jews fleeing" is ridiculous when most Arab states actually prohibited Jewish emigration for several decades until the 1970s. That's a pretty slow "flight."
Second, in most cases no properties were seized even when the landlords voluntarily chose to become absentee landlords and move to the so-called "State of Israel." In Syria, for instance, Arabs who live in properties owned by Jews continue to pay rent to Jews who hold title to those properties even though their landlords have been absentee for 40 years. This is a principle of rule of law and property rights.
Oh, so the 200 Jews who were killed, 1000 injured, along with hundreds of Jewish homes and business which were destroyed during the Farhud in Baghdad was probably just some sort of massive accident which somehow occurred only to Jews? You should've been around to tell the 100,000+ people who fled the country as a result that "there's no Jewish Exodus" and it's "ridiculous to flee." Oh and the Aleppo massacre in Syria, I suppose that never happened either? The emigration restrictions which you mentioned is but one indicator of the rigid restrictions placed on Jews in various Arab/Muslim nations which caused them to try ever harder to escape such racism
Ray Rider wrote:Are you sure you want to side with his captors?
Yes, they did that, but also made quite sure that the Palestiniens could not do that.daddy1gringo wrote: The Isaelis built all the industry, modern housing, utilities, and other ingredients of a better quality of life there, so it would be unfair to send them out, and many of the supposed Palestinians in Israel are actually immigrants from Israel's neighbors, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, who moved there to take advantage of the jobs and quality of life.
daddy1gringo wrote: So since the Arab neighbors are so concerned that their Palestinian brothers have a homeland, they could give it to them. After all Jordan and Syria are so much bigger and have so much more land to spare. Shoot, they even border on one another, so they could put the land on the border, split the gift and be even more generous.
So the Palestinians have a homeland right where they are from, Israel's defensive borders aren't compromised, and everybody is happy. Problem solved.
So to sum up, your reply is 2 parts:saxitoxin wrote:daddy1gringo wrote:Well that's an interesting concept, but I'll improve on it.Lil_SlimShady wrote:Why can't the sacred land of Israel just be moved to Australia? There is plenty of room, warm weather, and the Aussies are chill. Plus, the Jews will be able to do so much less damage to the world if they are surrounded by a body of water. If Britain granted them rights to Palestinian land in the 40's then why cant they just change their mind?
Who took the land from whom just depends on how far back in history you choose to go so you can't base anything on that. Australia is awfully far away; all parties want a homeland in that area. The Isaelis built all the industry, modern housing, utilities, and other ingredients of a better quality of life there, so it would be unfair to send them out, and many of the supposed Palestinians in Israel are actually immigrants from Israel's neighbors, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, who moved there to take advantage of the jobs and quality of life.
So since the Arab neighbors are so concerned that their Palestinian brothers have a homeland, they could give it to them. After all Jordan and Syria are so much bigger and have so much more land to spare. Shoot, they even border on one another, so they could put the land on the border, split the gift and be even more generous.
So the Palestinians have a homeland right where they are from, Israel's defensive borders aren't compromised, and everybody is happy. Problem solved.
That would be fine. Israel will just need to first pay the $300,000,000,000 they owe the Palestinians for buildings, bank accounts and other assets they seized.
But Israel will never be able to pay their debts since their entire annual government budget is only 1/10th of the amount they owe. So, the only solution is to treat the Israeli nation like every deadbeat debtor in the world is treated - posting an eviction notice on the front door. If they don't leave you take them to court, just like you do with every deadbeat. And if they refuse to show up to court, you forcibly move them out. And, if the deadbeat waves a gun around at you when you show up to throw them out onto the curb, you fire a Grad rocket in their face.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users