Progressive Tory Posted February 18, 2009 Author Report Posted February 18, 2009 Speaking out on violence in Gaza makes you an anit-semite. Not wanting to give money to a group the feel they are spiritually superiour to the rest of us and have a quiet agenda to displace us the infidels makes us anti-Mulim ----being anti-liar...or telling the truth leaves you open to the spinning of the classic reverse where the person pointing out what is true is made out the liar ---- You just can't win. Unless you take the time to slowly talk to the idots and draw them a picture so they can understand - but that is tedious and I personally don't care enough about idiots to help them out at this late point in my life.. My concern is where are they going with this? One red flag for me was in Kenney's interview when he spoke of the growing anti-semitism and anti-zionism. To me they are two separate things. Zionism started out innocently, and was a good thing - Jews returning to their promised land. But now it means something entirely different - taking land they're not entitled to through systematic genocide. So why this conference? Do they discuss PR to convince the world at large or the UN to simply ignore Israeli aggression, or will it be something more? Will we no longer be able to speak out, unless it's in support of Israel and against Palestine? No more demonstrations or you risk being arrested for 'hate crimes'? I find this all rather disturbing. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 So why this conference? To counter this sort of nonsense. But now it means something entirely different - taking land they're not entitled to through systematic genocide. To wit, look up blood libel and you will see how this sort of anti zionist propaganda can be scontrued as anti semitic as well. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Progressive Tory Posted February 18, 2009 Author Report Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) I think by even the most liberal definitions, Hamas is a terrorist party. Now of course there are those who think a suicide bombing that deliberately targets civilians including women and children such as the restaurant attack in Jerusalem which killed 7 children is a legitimate form of resistance. And there are those who think bombing a school after encouraging refugees to hide out there, killing 350 civilians, including women and children; is a legitimate form of resistance. From the Liberal Defense of Murder. "The IDF's (Israeli Defense Forces) initial justification for the attack on the Al-Fakhura school was that Hamas had used the building to fire mortars from, and its tanks had responded. Implicit in this was an admission that they had targeted the school on purpose. The tank shells, presumably shot from quite nearby, were fired by soldiers operating under orders from command centres equipped with detailed targeting intelligence. As is now known, the Israeli military had the GPS coordinates not only of this UN school but of the other UN schools that it attacked. And the first thing the IDF let us know is that it was done on purpose. Their excuse was barbaric, of course. The idea that an invading force may attack a building filled with hundreds of terrorised civilians just in order to kill two of those resisting the invasion is nothing short of grotesque." This war has no noble cause. I don't side with Israel or Palestine. Hamas are just as dangerous as the Israeli Defense Forces. Both sides are using 'terror' to promote their ideals. My point is with this new definition of 'anti-semitism', it could take away our right to protest barbaric behaviour, because our government tells us that if we show even the smallest bit of sympathy for the victims of Palestine, it could be viewed as a hate crime. I am not anti-zionist and respect Israeli's right to be on the land outlined by the treaty. This does not include Gaza, even if their scriptures contradict the legal treaty. Both Israel and Palestine have democratically elected governments who support the use of violence (terror). We need to be able to study the facts and make up our own minds, without recrimination. Edited February 18, 2009 by Progressive Tory Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 And there are those who think bombing a school after encouraging refugees to hide out there, killing 350 civilians, including women and children; is a legitimate form of resistance. You are about a month behind in your propaganda. It was confirmed that the ISraelis did not strike the school, they struck beside the school at terrorists firing at IDF. We need to be able to study the facts and make up our own minds, without recrimination. Yeah, good advice. See that you take it. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 The Terrorist Propaganda Machine will always find credulous dupes.... UN issues retraction over Gaza school bombing PRINT FRIENDLY EMAIL STORY The World Today - Friday, 6 February , 2009 12:34:00 Reporter: David Mark BRENDAN TREMBATH: The United Nations has backed down from a claim that a UN run school in Gaza was hit during an Israeli mortar attack last month. Forty-three people were reportedly killed in the attack. But a clarification issued by the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian affairs says the shelling and all the casualties happened outside the school. At the time of the attack there was a barrage of international condemnation directed at Israel. http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2008/s2484349.htm Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Progressive Tory Posted February 18, 2009 Author Report Posted February 18, 2009 The Terrorist Propaganda Machine will always find credulous dupes.... Exactly. Which further proves my point. Both sides are engaged in terror and we should have the right to protest both Israeli aggression and Palestine response to the aggression; without being accused of being anti-semite. This is not about racial hatred. It is about hatred of any acts of War. Israel has no legal claim to Gaza as per treaty. 'Impressive gains and achieving goals' have sinister meanings. "He praised the military's "impressive gains " in Gaza, adding: "Israel is nearing the goals which it set itself, but more patience, determination and effort is still demanded." Referring to last week's UN Security Council call for an immediate ceasefire, Mr Olmert said "nobody should be allowed to decide for us if we are allowed to strike". Both Hamas and Israel have rejected the UN resolution." There are always two sides to every story. "The increasingly forceful tone of statements critical of Israel issuing from certain European Union governments during the current Gaza crisis, plus the news that Israel has decided to send ministers on a tour of six insufficiently docile European countries as a kind of propaganda “blitzkrieg”, should not lull us into assuming that the EU will maintain a strong stand against Israeli state terrorism once there is a ceasefire. Opposing this was or feeling sympathy for inncocent victims on both sides, doesn't qualify as anti-semitism. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Both sides are engaged in terror Wrong and we should have the right to protest both Israeli aggression and Palestine response to the aggression; without being accused of being anti-semite. I suppose it would help if you didn't confuse aggresion with defence and palestinians response with terrorism. I will qualify that there is a defference between the anti semites who purposely distort and those who can't tell the difference, but in the end, the results are the same. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Israel has no legal claim to Gaza as per treaty. That's a nonsequitor, irrelevant and a red herring...the triple header. Israel not only has no legal claim to Gaza, Israel doesn't claim to have one either. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Moonbox Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Zionism started out innocently, and was a good thing - Jews returning to their promised land. But now it means something entirely different - taking land they're not entitled to through systematic genocide. Alright PT I mostly ignored everything you said until I read this. If Israel were at ALL interested in genocide there wouldn't be a Palestinian left alive in the area. We'd see massive death camps and hundreds of thousands of dead. Israel, if it so wished, could wipe the area clean (including its neighbours in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt etc). There really is THAT big a disparity in power. Now, given this simple fact, I find it rather ridiculous that you'd use the term 'genocide'. I won't argue that the Palestinian people nowadays have it rough, but maybe if you lived under constant threat of random rocket attack originating from just outside your doorstep you'd have some perspective. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
eyeball Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Perhaps if Canadians were to experience what its like to be discriminated against or dispossesed they would would know how the differences between things like what's right and wrong or between defence and aggression can get more blurry as time passes. Its plain to see the situation in the region adjacent to the Mediterranian's eastern shore has been a terrifying one for all who have lived there for generations. Taking sides is just about the very last thing these unfortunate people need, it doesn't help anyone least of all the one's who insist on doing so. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Progressive Tory Posted February 18, 2009 Author Report Posted February 18, 2009 Israel not only has no legal claim to Gaza, Israel doesn't claim to have one either. Then what are they doing there and why are they now engaged in covert operations in Iran? Israel launches covert war against Iran This was an Israeli invasion. We can't support that without question, but if we question it, will it now mean that we are anti-semites? That's what this convention says. Who can probe Gaza war crimes claims "The claims against Hamas include firing unguided rockets at residential areas. The allegations against Israel include firing on ambulances or preventing them from reaching people in need. The claims against both Israel and Hamas include the indiscriminate use of weapons such as heavy artillery in densely populated areas, and using civilians as human shields. Amnesty International says it has found "compelling evidence" that white phosphorus weapons were used by Israel in crowded parts of Gaza." If both sides are not engaged in terrorist acts than the white powder must be icing sugar and Israel is showering Palestine with hugs and kisses. This war is complex and tragic but I want to make up my own mind and certainly reserve the right to feel sympathy for innocent victims. That is not a hate crime and sure as hell is not anti-semitism. Mr. Kenney has got some explaining to do, as do all the MPs who attended this conference. Otherwise 'whore' is too nice a word. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
Progressive Tory Posted February 18, 2009 Author Report Posted February 18, 2009 Taking sides is just about the very last thing these unfortunate people need, it doesn't help anyone least of all the one's who insist on doing so. Exactly. It only fuels the violence. I side with the innocent victims of both regions, who suffer because their elected governments engage in terrorist acts, that they in turn pay for. No one is right. Both are wrong. But if my not glorifying the acts of Israel make me anti-semite, or criticizing Hamas for exploiting civilians, makes me Islamaphobic, then I don't give a damn; and I sure as hell am not going to let some convention of the misguided tell me that I'm not allowed to speak my mind. Send Kenney to Palestine. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
Oleg Bach Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Then what are they doing there and why are they now engaged in covert operations in Iran?Israel launches covert war against Iran This was an Israeli invasion. We can't support that without question, but if we question it, will it now mean that we are anti-semites? That's what this convention says. Who can probe Gaza war crimes claims "The claims against Hamas include firing unguided rockets at residential areas. The allegations against Israel include firing on ambulances or preventing them from reaching people in need. The claims against both Israel and Hamas include the indiscriminate use of weapons such as heavy artillery in densely populated areas, and using civilians as human shields. Amnesty International says it has found "compelling evidence" that white phosphorus weapons were used by Israel in crowded parts of Gaza." If both sides are not engaged in terrorist acts than the white powder must be icing sugar and Israel is showering Palestine with hugs and kisses. This war is complex and tragic but I want to make up my own mind and certainly reserve the right to feel sympathy for innocent victims. That is not a hate crime and sure as hell is not anti-semitism. Mr. Kenney has got some explaining to do, as do all the MPs who attended this conference. Otherwise 'whore' is too nice a word. So if Israel has no legal claim to Gaza then I assume that some informal party has taken claim to the open air prison camp - and that entity supplied the exposives tossed down from above to quell the animals of their private zoo - I wonder who really has the deed to this strip of land - perhaps someone in New York...maybe Washington....who is the legal owner? Quote
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Then what are they doing there and why are they now engaged in covert operations in Iran? Why do you keep thowing in these non sequitors? What on earth does Isreal and Gaza have to do with Iran What does having or not having a legal claim to the Gaza have to do with why Israel invaded? I'm all for thinking outside the box but try to keep inside the park. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Amnesty International says it has found "compelling evidence" that white phosphorus weapons were used by Israel in crowded parts of Gaza." [/i] Unfortunately the dearth of compelling victims is lacking. They used WP...so what? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Oleg Bach Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Back to the whore factor for a moment. What do you call it when a person runs as a conservative - gains the loving trust of conservatives who vote for her - then suddenly crosses the floor to sleep with the liberals because she was "not comfortable" ..... That is not a political whore - These are the actions of a fraud artist. Quote
Progressive Tory Posted February 18, 2009 Author Report Posted February 18, 2009 Back to the whore factor for a moment. What do you call it when a person runs as a conservative - gains the loving trust of conservatives who vote for her - then suddenly crosses the floor to sleep with the liberals because she was "not comfortable" ..... That is not a political whore - These are the actions of a fraud artist. Hmmm. Are you talking about Belinda? And what do you call a guy who couldn't satisfy her so she had to cross the floor to find a real man, and the best the scorned lover could come up with was calling her a dog? Not to worry though, he shacked up with the daughter of the Power family, and $ 20,000.00 later, he was whistling dixie. All of this is totally irrelevant. I don't like Belinda or Peter MacKay. They're both flakes. The 'whore' reference was right from the headline in my paper, and it made me laugh. It also made me read the rest of the article and I was no longer laughing. Kenney postures during a convention where the topic is making any criticism of Israel a hate crime and anti-semitism; and threatens to revoke the funding of an Arab-Canadian group. He didn't mention that of the half million dollars, only 5% went to the Arab communities. That wouldn't make him 'the man' and the high fives would be barely low twos. (I need just one to show him how I really feel) If he thinks I'm going to shake in my boots for calling the Israeli Defense Forces and Hamas, Terrorist groups, who are using innocent civilians to further their cause, I'll call him worse things than a 'whore'. In fact, he'll have nothing left to sell. Listen to me talkin' tough. I might just email him to see if I can get on a list. I'd like to be on a list. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
M.Dancer Posted February 18, 2009 Report Posted February 18, 2009 Kenney postures during a convention where the topic is making any criticism of Israel a hate crime and anti-semitism; You really do have a problem with not distorting stories about Jews, don't you? “We are witnessing today a new, escalating, sophisticated, virulent, global and even lethal anti-Semitism,” said Mr. Cotler. “The time has come to not only sound the alarm about this resurgent threat, but to act. For as history has taught us only too well: while it may begin with Jews, it does not end with Jews.” http://www.liberal.ca/story_15616_e.aspx What we are witnessing today is a new sophisticated, virulent and even lethal anti-Semitism, reminiscent of the atmospherics of the 1930s, and without parallel since the end of the Second World War. This new anti-Jewishness found early juridical expression in the United Nations' "Zionism is Racism" resolution, but has gone beyond that. Traditional anti-Semitism is the discrimination against, denial of or assault upon the rights of Jews to live as equal members of whatever host society they inhabit. The new anti-Semitism involves discrimination against the right of the Jewish people to live as an equal member of the family of nations -- the denial of, and assault upon, the Jewish people's right even to live -- with Israel as the "collective Jew among the nations." http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/s...html?id=1296433 Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Argus Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 Perhaps, but we have to remember that Hamas is also the Democratically elected gov't of Palestine. Hitler was democratically elected too. So what exactly is your point? Or do you have a point? Have you ever had a point? Our foreign policy supports Israel, but it's not unusual for groups to protest a government's foreign policy. By publicly challenging Arab-Canadians in the name of anti-semitism, doesn't seem like a wise decision. I have a problem with foreigners coming here, in this case Arabs, calling themselves Canadians, then taking government money to lobby on behalf of terrorists. Everyone knows groups like this are no different, culturally, spiritually, intelectually, or morally, than Hamas. The only difference is the hatemongers in them don't have the balls to do anything more than talk - and from a safe distance, at that. " Kenney said he has already asked department officials to weigh comments made by groups when evaluating funding applications, and the comments made by the Arab Federation president will affect its contribution..." So where does this end? Will it include homophobic remarks? Why is it I suspect that if a group's president became notorious for hating homosexuals and making homophobic remarks you'd be screaming at the top of your lungs to make sure any government funding they got was instantly rescinded? Who gets to decide what is acceptable? The elected government. Will he attend or initiate a conference on 'Islamophobia'? I think anti-Muslim sentiment is much stronger in this country than anti-semitism. Really? And how many firebombings of Muslim schools and mosques have taken place in the last few years? A rough number, please. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 Arab-Canadians have every right to protest Canada's foreign policy in regards to the Israeli-Palestine conflict. Who cares what flag they're flying. I wouldn't know a Hamas flag if I fell over it, but since they are the democratically elected gov't of the region, would expect no less. Arab-Canadians are protesting as Arabs. Their sentiment, most of it viciously anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish, comes from their cultural upbringing in the third world shitholes of the Muslim world, where free thinking is - beg pardon - an entirely foreign concept. None of them, in these groups, have distanced themselves from their ignorant, backward, religious tribal hate, and we should pay precisely ZERO attention to them. None of them should even be Canadian citizens, for that matter, much less recieving government funding to lobby for terrorists. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 It all stems from the same 'new world order' vision of the radical Christian movement; aligning the world according to ancient scriptures. However, this anti-Muslim conference was started by a Liberal MP.As to Bilderberg, it was probably through Conrad Black. He was the one who sponsored Stephen Harper back in the day; before he was PM. He also gave a lot of seed money to the Reform Party. Why am I not surprised that someone like you would be an avid conspiracy theory buff? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 (edited) Exactly. Which further proves my point. That just whipped right over your head, didn't it? Both sides are engaged in terror and we should have the right to protest both Israeli aggression and Palestine response to the aggression; without being accused of being anti-semite. The Israeli agression and the uhm, Palestinian response to it? This is not about racial hatred. It is about hatred of any acts of War. Nonsense. It's about people not liking Jews. Opposing this was or feeling sympathy for inncocent victims on both sides, doesn't qualify as anti-semitism. There are probably at least 100 nations around the world who are completely undemocratic and have zero respect for human rights of any kind. Hamas is one of those, btw. Syria and, for the most part, all Muslim nations are among that group. People like you stroll down the lane, weaving in and out and around such nations as they beat, rape and torture with impunity, smiling and waving at them as you pass, blithely ignoring their murderous behaviour, wishing them good day, and then, you see an Israeli pushing a Palestinian - who has just pushed him. You burst into tears, scream in horror, jump up and down and point. "Look! Look at the human rights abuser! Oh someone stop him!" And you're joined by all those "great defenders" of human rights, blood dripping off their hands, who put their arms around you and tell you have wise and kind and humane you are to join them in their denunciation of the evil Israel. They're just bloody hypocrites, though. While you're just a bloody fool. Edited February 19, 2009 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
fellowtraveller Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Huh? What does a politician who happens to be gay, and married to his partner, have to do with being a whore? Are you privy to his sexual exploits? Hmmm...first hand knowledge? John Baird is still playing the field.I only used the term from the newspaper headline, which I originally thought was laughable. Not so much now that I know what he meant. What a disgusting and oppressive concept, that you'd think that gay people are whores. You should be ashamed of yourself. Quote The government should do something.
eyeball Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 They used WP...so what? So what is a valid question about anything that's used to kill people. How long it takes until why is equally moot is anyone's guess but I doubt it will be in my lifetime...so what, I guess. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
M.Dancer Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 So what is a valid question about anything that's used to kill people. How long it takes until why is equally moot is anyone's guess but I doubt it will be in my lifetime...so what, I guess. Swing and a miss. WP isn't used to kill people, althiough it can.... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.