Free Gaza Movement

[DogOnPorch]

All unquestionably true, but first-hand accounts can be monumentally mistaken as well. So the complex dance of how we tell stories about ourselves is a moebius strip.

Also true, but I'm more referring to authors/historians with actual war experience...like the fellow in my sig.

Edited October 18, 2012 by DogOnPorch

[bud]

Benny Morris himself describes himself as one the "new historians", which is a euphemism for a historical revisionist. It's not necessarily a problem, sometimes historical revision is justified if the original dominant narratives are incomplete or incorrect. More importantly, Morris is a staunch Zionist and is certainly not on board with bud's Islamic anti-Semitic narratives.

either you cite how and where i'm a 'islamic anti-semite' or your words have no meaning and it will be seen as another one of your attempts to silence criticism of israel.

the information i have posted come directly from books written by benny morris and other israeli historians. specifically the information about irgun, lehi and former israeli prime ministers who were the leaders of these groups and who participated in terrorism and attacks on the allies. so what you're doing is calling benny morris and other israeli historians' information "islamic and anti-semitic narrative".

Edited October 18, 2012 by bud

[GostHacked]

History is decided and written by the winners, not who by who was right.

[DogOnPorch]

History is decided and written by the winners, not who by who was right.

Are you sure you want to stick by that cliche' statement? I can go to Amazon right now and buy any number of historical works written by "the losers".

[kraychik]

Are you sure you want to stick by that cliche' statement? I can go to Amazon right now and buy any number of historical works written by "the losers".

Exactly. Outcomes are often decided by winners, or at least primarily, but certainly not history. And certainly not today.

[Guest Peeves]

Exactly. Outcomes are often decided by winners, or at least primarily, but certainly not history. And certainly not today.

Long ago in a place far far away there was no internet or easy means of researching opinions. Unfortunately that often has led to even more confusion. It's not necessarily factual.

(Unless Gore-Suzuki- writes it )

[DogOnPorch]

Suzuki is a really nice fellow in person.

Yes...the old "victors write history" no longer holds. Otherwise there'd be no revisionists telling us that Stalingrad was really a German victory.

[bud]

so yeah, once again, dogonporch is unable to counter facts and so he deviates and begins attacking the sources. this time, he's trying to belittle and dismiss an israeli historian and a self-proclaimed zionist, benny morris. his work, which uses documentation from many different sides, some being finally released by the israeli government, decades after what had happened, has been praised anywhere you turn to. except perhaps by those who have a need to whitewash the past.

how often do you repeat the grand mufti's ties to the nazis and try to paint the palestinians as allies of the nazis? why then so silent on irgun and lehi and their leaders who not only attacked and killed the british but they also committed terrorist attacks against civilians. then, their leaders became prime ministers of israel. wouldn't that be as alarming, if not more alarming?

so why are you so selective about your history if you claim to be honest and truthful?

Edited October 19, 2012 by bud

[DogOnPorch]

Ummm...I'm not denying that Begin and Shamir were Irgun or the Stern Gang or whatever name they were using at the time. You're the one claiming the Germ...sorry...the ITALIANS now armed them rather than looting their rifles from British forts. This is typical Mark Weber 'history'...you've never heard of him, I know...but it's still his version of things.

So here's the question. How, during the dead of WW2, did the Italians make their way to the East Med with a load of weapons for Jews?

[Guest Peeves]

Ummm...I'm not denying that Begin and Shamir were Irgun or the Stern Gang or whatever name they were using at the time. You're the one claiming the Germ...sorry...the ITALIANS now armed them rather than looting their rifles from British forts. This is typical Mark Weber 'history'...you've never heard of him, I know...but it's still his version of things.

So here's the question. How, during the dead of WW2, did the Italians make their way to the East Med with a load of weapons for Jews?

Bud would of course prefer that you used Zionists than simply Jews.

I think there are claims (of the disputed territories taken in war) by others, to the West Bank, Golan, and Gaza. but....they don;t want them as it would include the present Arabs.

[Guest Peeves]

Suzuki is a really nice fellow in person.

Yes...the old "victors write history" no longer holds. Otherwise there'd be no revisionists telling us that Stalingrad was really a German victory.

As an aside. An acquaintance sat next to Suzuki on a flight. He briefly introduced himself sitting thus close it seemed the cordial thing to do. He said he was 'cut', and coldly ignored for the flight

An aside, aside.

I bet had there been a photo op. he would have theatrically fawned over the recognition and attention.

[bleeding heart]

Well, sure. You disagree with his politics, so you just know he's a bad person.

[kraychik]

Well, sure. You disagree with his politics, so you just know he's a bad person.

Why don't you tell us more about post-1967 settlements (do you now know what a settlement is in the context of Israel?) were at the root of the Jewish-Arab conflict that begun in the late 19th century? I'd love to hear it.

[kraychik]

As an aside. An acquaintance sat next to Suzuki on a flight. He briefly introduced himself sitting thus close it seemed the cordial thing to do. He said he was 'cut', and coldly ignored for the flight

An aside, aside.

I bet had there been a photo op. he would have theatrically fawned over the recognition and attention.

What? He said he was "cut"? I don't understand.

[bleeding heart]

Why don't you tell us more about post-1967 settlements (do you now know what a settlement is in the context of Israel?) were at the root of the Jewish-Arab conflict that begun in the late 19th century? I'd love to hear it.

What the hell are you talking about?

Peeves made a specific remark about a specif person...and I made a half-serious little retort to it.

You've got to learn to stop quoting me, and then responding to something totally divorced from my response.

That is, it is not really necessary for you to insist that you don't read very well.

[kraychik]

What the hell are you talking about?

Peeves made a specific remark about a specif person...and I made a half-serious little retort to it.

You've got to learn to stop quoting me, and then responding to something totally divorced from my response.

That is, it is not really necessary for you to insist that you don't read very well.

Like I said earlier, you're low-hanging fruit and I feel like throwing some of the absurd comments of yours that I've read back in your face. From libertarianism having leftist origins, to settlements (which you still can't define) being a core cause of the Jewish-Arab conflict in and around Israel, and more recently a suggestion that recognizance of the overlap between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is somehow "statism"... it's easy to beat you up in these forums. And sometimes it's fun, I must admit.

[kraychik]

Can you even define the term "settlement" in the context of the Jewish-Arab conflict without using an internet search? I doubt it

[DogOnPorch]

Bud would of course prefer that you used Zionists than simply Jews.

What bud is trying to do w/o any real proof is to equate Irgun to the the Mufti. Thus pulling the ol' everyone was dealing with the Devil ploy. After Taranto, the Allies were masters of most of the Mediterranean. After Sicily, they were undisputed masters of all the Med. There was absolutely no way for the Italians to get weapons to the Mandate of Palestine. The closest the Axis ever got was El Alamein.

Edited October 19, 2012 by DogOnPorch

[Rue]

so yeah, once again, dogonporch is unable to counter facts and so he deviates and begins attacking the sources. this time, he's trying to belittle and dismiss an israeli historian and a self-proclaimed zionist, benny morris. his work, which uses documentation from many different sides, some being finally released by the israeli government, decades after what had happened, has been praised anywhere you turn to. except perhaps by those who have a need to whitewash the past.

how often do you repeat the grand mufti's ties to the nazis and try to paint the palestinians as allies of the nazis? why then so silent on irgun and lehi and their leaders who not only attacked and killed the british but they also committed terrorist attacks against civilians. then, their leaders became prime ministers of israel. wouldn't that be as alarming, if not more alarming?

so why are you so selective about your history if you claim to be honest and truthful?

Tripe. The only one engaging in a personal attack yet again is you. For the record I have blasted Dog on the Porch a thousand times and he has never taken any disagreement personally. You are full of it not that he needs me to defend his responses.

May I suggest Bud that you are out of your league with him or kraychik. Run along before you get hurt by a complete sentence spelled correctly and that flows coherently.

Edited October 19, 2012 by Rue

[bleeding heart]

and more recently a suggestion that recognizance of the overlap between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is somehow "statism"...

Whoa, whoa, big guy. This is flatly untrue.

What did I just say about your reading problem?

Mr Canada said criticizing Israel is antisemitic (not that some of it is, or that it can be...it just is)...and if anyone criticizes Israel, they're saying the nation has no right to exist.

that, exactly and only, was to what I responded.

So...try not to distort my words or opinions, if you don't mind.

it's easy to beat you up in these forums. And sometimes it's fun, I must admit.

Well of course it's easy for you to invent posiitons that I don't hold and then knock them down.

But it has nothing whatsoever to even do with me. You're just masturbating.

[Guest Peeves]

What? He said he was "cut"? I don't understand.

Cut is a colloquialism-idiom for ignored rudely.

What does it mean to cut someone?

not like cut with a knife, but like, the slang term of cut as in, "girl, i will CUT you." help? thanks!

• 3 years ago
  
• Report Abuse
  

Glyn B

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

To ignore someone completely. To just walk past them in the street as though they were one more stranger. The phrase is usually "To cut someone dead".

http://www.answers.com/topic/cut-someone…

[bleeding heart]

I assumed it meant "drunk." (Which reminds me, got some oatmeal stout to drink.....)..

[jbg]

Tripe. The only one engaging in a personal attack yet again is you. For the record I have blasted Dog on the Porch a thousand times and he has never taken any disagreement personally. You are full of it not that he needs me to defend his responses.

I am calling out BS when I read it. You have taken it personal to me quite a bit.

[cybercoma]

This doesn't really have to do with the specific topic at hand, but it does have to do with Gaza and I don't think it quite deserves its own thread.

Israel systematically blocked food supplies from the Gaza Strip, keeping Palestinians, half of them children, on the brink of starvation. Now don't tell me Israel needs to be protected no matter what, when these are the kinds of despicable things that they are doing to Palestinians.

[Guest American Woman]

I am calling out BS when I read it. You have taken it personal to me quite a bit.

I think it's apparent that some people get frustrated; I know I have at times, and I think Rue likely has. I think Rue is frustrated by your agenda against Muslims, which I know you say you don't have, but your posts/threads sometimes indicate otherwise. Since you and he are both in the "Israel has a right to exist" camp, and both are Jewish, I think sometimes your viewpoint may frustrate him more because of it.

I could be wrong, but I do appreciate the knowledge that I gain from Rue's posts, in spite of his, to quote him, "Mr Rude Face" approach sometimes - and, as he has pointed out, so many here are "rude" - I've been told to "die!" on more than one occasion and nothing has come of it, so it's interesting that he has been suspended for "being rude." As I said, posters, being human, sometimes get frustrated.

Having said that, I know you don't get rude, jbg - I think you make a conscious effort not to. I, on the other hand, will give back the attitude that I get - but not as strongly if I feel it's crossing the line.

Anyway, for what it's worth, since some have been discussing this, that's my take on it.