Argus Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 (edited) Uh, you didn't answer the question and went to your anti-semite card again. Stop being so hopelessly predictable. Besides Syria, let me know which one of the neighbours has killed, injured and displaced as many people as Israel has. It's time to stop pretending Israel is anything but a rogue state that brutalizes anyone who is not one of them. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, Turkey, Russia... shall I go on? Egypt sentences people to death a thousand at a time. How many indignant, outraged posts have you made about that? Edited May 13, 2016 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
jacee Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 Is this a trick question? The reason the Israeli's attack his family is because a Palestinian who kills a Jew is made into a hero, and his family gets an annual pension from the Palestinian government. His name is painted on flags and posters. Razing the home is an attempt to make young would-be martyres think twice. Oh and that makes it just hunky dory to you? Razing a family's house ... to intimidate youth? Did you think kristallnacht - to intimidate Jews - was OK too? Is there some reason why it's now OK for Jews to act like their oppressors acted to them? . Quote
Scott Mayers Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 The Jew haters want to do their best to compare Israel to Nazis to justify their hate. This notwithstanding the fact Israel is the only democracy in the area, bans the death penalty, and has an independent media and judiciary - which no one else in the region has. Logic question: If (one is discriminatory against X) AND (they desire to hide their accountability of their hatred), then (they will attack X's behaviors using strong rhetoric). However, if (one will attack X's behavior using strong rhetoric), is it logically 'true' that (one is discriminatory against X) AND (they desire to hide their accountability of their hatred)? "If A then B" is a conditional truth, and then B appears to be true, is A true? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 Logic question: If (one is discriminatory against X) AND (they desire to hide their accountability of their hatred), then (they will attack X's behaviors using strong rhetoric). However, if (one will attack X's behavior using strong rhetoric), is it logically 'true' that (one is discriminatory against X) AND (they desire to hide their accountability of their hatred)? "If A then B" is a conditional truth, and then B appears to be true, is A true? Reality question. Which side actually joined the Nazis? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Big Guy Posted May 13, 2016 Author Report Posted May 13, 2016 The rest of the world, in the form of a UN committee, criticizes the way Israeli deals with Palestinians: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/panel-warns-excessive-force-israel-160513132515114.html It is time to convene a World Court and charge Israel with war crimes and allow Israel to try to defend what the rest of the world sees as atrocities. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
DogOnPorch Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 The rest of the world, in the form of a UN committee, criticizes the way Israeli deals with Palestinians: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/panel-warns-excessive-force-israel-160513132515114.html It is time to convene a World Court and charge Israel with war crimes and allow Israel to try to defend what the rest of the world sees as atrocities. "Assenting countries"...like Israel. They agreed to be inspected by the pro-OIC committee. Iran isn't on that list. Nor are any of Israel's neighbours...not being "assenting" to such an investigation. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Scott Mayers Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 Reality question. Which side actually joined the Nazis? You're asking a question without attending to the one I posed. My point is that we cannot LOGICALLY assume one IS or IS NOT being discriminatory based on Argus' belief. It may be the case, but it is NOT sufficient to warrant an equally but most overt volatile accusation, especially when those claiming problems have not been proven biased on their claims. And to your 'question', "Nazi" means "Nationalist" or, depending on the original degree to one's intent on "socialism", "National Socialism". This is the belief that one's ethnicity is relevant to some political justification to have laws favoring that ethnicity. AND...by "ethnicity", this means ones' genetic AND cultural heritages are intrinsically 'linked'. That is, if you believe that you have some genetic ancestry has some contingent link to their presence in some unique place, their actions, behaviors, or religions are as 'linked' to yourself as is your genes such that you believe you have a 'god-granted' (Nature's decree) to some political FAVOR to your ingroup in distinct recognition IN LAW with exception to other people, or, especially to ANY specific non-group (as the Nazis targeting the Jew OR to the Jew targeting the Muslim), you are by DEFINITION a "National Socialist"....a "Nazi". The State of Israel, its political constitution, favors an assumed link of a Jewish identity as a precursor that defines their 'social' acceptance in law. This is a prerequisite factor that is sufficient to prove they are of the same political setup as Nazi Germany. Note that while Nazi Germany targeted Jews, their discrimination was more universal to discriminate against ANY non-supporting German Nationalist. That is, they too would have 'accepted' the Jews originally had they not been bound to their own Nationalistic threat, perceived real or not. This is the same with present day Israel. While token 'others' exist within Israel, only to the extent Israel perceives them recognizing the supreme authority and 'right' of Jewish Nationalism, do they accept such people to be allowed to persist as a function of their system. But for those they perceive as "Anti-Israel", they deem them as the Germans under Hitler interpreted Jews there to be "Anti-German". They cannot use such standard demarcation as the Germans did with respect to the ritual of circumcision to divide the population which makes it more difficult. But if one had some 'tattoo' of some unaccepted Muslim group, I assure you this would be sufficient to send them to the camps (the controlled and policed or occupied lands that make a pretense of being something other.) If and when this option runs out and Israel would be able to do so without the eyes of the world watching them, as they are continuously attempting to do, they too will resort to a 'final solution of the question of the Muslims'! Quote
Argus Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 Logic question: If (one is discriminatory against X) AND (they desire to hide their accountability of their hatred), then (they will attack X's behaviors using strong rhetoric). However, if (one will attack X's behavior using strong rhetoric), is it logically 'true' that (one is discriminatory against X) AND (they desire to hide their accountability of their hatred)? "If A then B" is a conditional truth, and then B appears to be true, is A true? Here's another logical question for you. If one is outraged and indignant about alleged violations of human rights, or human rights abuses would one not be as outraged and indignant regardless of where those abuses occurred? If, for example, one was ONLY concerned with allegations of human rights abuses in Israel and nowhere else, would that not lead people to suspect an ulterior motive in such 'outrage'? And if one repeatedly called for us to "wipe our hands" of Israel, and also to befriend Iran, which has a worse human rights record, would that not confirm that such 'outrage' was false, that the individual really had little concern with human rights abuses and was simply looking for excuses to condemn that Jewish country? 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
DogOnPorch Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 You're asking a question without attending to the one I posed. My point is that we cannot LOGICALLY assume one IS or IS NOT being discriminatory based on Argus' belief. It may be the case, but it is NOT sufficient to warrant an equally but most overt volatile accusation, especially when those claiming problems have not been proven biased on their claims....etc. Only the Palestinian Cause actually joined the Nazis....formed all Muslim SS Panzer divisions...participated in perpetrating the Holocaust. The Zionists formed what was called the Jewish Brigade which fought with battle honours for the Allies. You know....the good guys. Mr Burns playing Call of Duty: Wait....I'm shooting at Nazis?? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Scott Mayers Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 Here's another logical question for you. If one is outraged and indignant about alleged violations of human rights, or human rights abuses would one not be as outraged and indignant regardless of where those abuses occurred? If, for example, one was ONLY concerned with allegations of human rights abuses in Israel and nowhere else, would that not lead people to suspect an ulterior motive in such 'outrage'? And if one repeatedly called for us to "wipe our hands" of Israel, and also to befriend Iran, which has a worse human rights record, would that not confirm that such 'outrage' was false, that the individual really had little concern with human rights abuses and was simply looking for excuses to condemn that Jewish country? Wow, another question as an answer to a question unqualified. If one is against Israel's discrimination, where do you justify they are simultaneously FOR Iran's discrimination, where it may possibly exist? This is a distraction as, speaking for myself, I don't have even sufficient information about Iran to speak for nor against anything. But holding to your own argument, it IS clear that Israel and supporters such as yourself DO contend FAVOR to Israel with clear hypocritical bias against Palestine as well as to Iran for behaviors in kind. But this also distracts from my own argument I raised of an identity of Hitler's Nationalism in kind to Israeli Nationalism. Respond to this. Quote
Scott Mayers Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 (edited) Only the Palestinian Cause actually joined the Nazis....formed all Muslim SS Panzer divisions...participated in perpetrating the Holocaust. The Zionists formed what was called the Jewish Brigade which fought with battle honours for the Allies. You know....the good guys. Lets say all of this were 'true' for a hypothetical. Is it not the Nationalism involved that is creating the problems across the board? And that it can never end until this false belief in demanding a link of ones' genetic heritage to their cultural/religious ones are abandoned also? ...that resolving one conflict caused by some 'perpetrator' Nationalistic irrationality by replacing it with a vengeful 'victim' Nationalistic one is not a means to STOP the Nationalism that IS the cause? Edit: It is just exchanging which one is the victim and which one is the perpetrator in a never-ending cycle. Edited May 13, 2016 by Scott Mayers Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 13, 2016 Report Posted May 13, 2016 Oh...it's true. Jewish Brigade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Brigade 13th SS and its auxiliaries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13th_Waffen_Mountain_Division_of_the_SS_Handschar_%281st_Croatian%29 The Mufti was the equivalent of a Major-General in the SS. He escaped from captivity and the noose at the end of WW2 only to turn-up back in the Middle East to start the Arab-israeli Wars. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Scott Mayers Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Oh...it's true. Jewish Brigade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Brigade 13th SS and its auxiliaries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13th_Waffen_Mountain_Division_of_the_SS_Handschar_%281st_Croatian%29 The Mufti was the equivalent of a Major-General in the SS. He escaped from captivity and the noose at the end of WW2 only to turn-up back in the Middle East to start the Arab-israeli Wars. I don't CARE! I asked you to simply presume all you believe about your faith in Israel's innocence and those 'evil' Palestinians as 'true' and then look deeper at the issue of Nationalism that underlies all such abuses on all sides. Do you think there is anything intrinsically 'wrong' with Nationalism here? Do you not see the links involved? The Palestinians may be doing this too but does two wrongs justify both to maintain continuous Nationalistic hatreds by both sides? You just exchange the labels of the extremes of who is "perpetrator" and who is "victim" regardless. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 (edited) I don't CARE! I asked you to simply presume all you believe about your faith in Israel's innocence and those 'evil' Palestinians as 'true' and then look deeper at the issue of Nationalism that underlies all such abuses on all sides. Do you think there is anything intrinsically 'wrong' with Nationalism here? Do you not see the links involved? The Palestinians may be doing this too but does two wrongs justify both to maintain continuous Nationalistic hatreds by both sides? You just exchange the labels of the extremes of who is "perpetrator" and who is "victim" regardless. The Palestinian Arabs started a war that they refuse to end...initially led by an escaped Nazi...then an international terrorist that liked to blow-up airliners, school buses, discos...now a Holocaust denier. Good bunch. I see why some would like them to have their own Jew-free state. Edited May 14, 2016 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Argus Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Wow, another question as an answer to a question unqualified. If one is against Israel's discrimination, where do you justify they are simultaneously FOR Iran's discrimination, where it may possibly exist? I asked you if it seemed logical to you that one could hate Israel, ostensibly for human rights abuses, but want closer ties to Iran, despite worse human rights abuses by the latter. I don't have even sufficient information about Iran to speak for nor against anything. Seriously? You don't possesses even basic information about the state of the world around us? But holding to your own argument, it IS clear that Israel and supporters such as yourself DO contend FAVOR to Israel with clear hypocritical bias against Palestine as well as to Iran for behaviors in kind. But Israel's human rights record is much better than that of the Palestinian governments or Iran. So there's no hypocrisy on this side. But this also distracts from my own argument I raised of an identity of Hitler's Nationalism Take it to the nationalism topic you created. I find the theory silly and uninteresting. 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
GostHacked Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Reality question. Which side actually joined the Nazis? And who on the other side did business with the Nazis? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 And who on the other side did business with the Nazis? Prescott Bush. Was he Jewish? Either way, the Palestinian Cause was the creation of an SS officer on the run from the hangman's noose for his role in the Holocaust. Perhaps that will sink in one day...eh? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Prescott Bush. Was he Jewish? No you don't have to be Jewish to do business with Nazis. But at least you are aware of companies and people living in Allied nations doing business with the Nazis. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 No you don't have to be Jewish to do business with Nazis. But at least you are aware of companies and people living in Allied nations doing business with the Nazis. Individual Americans did business with Nazi Germany before America entered the war. Then it became illegal. You missed that bit. But, back on topic, the biggest war crime is that of the Palestinian Cause itself. A dying ember of WW2. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Individual Americans did business with Nazi Germany before America entered the war. Then it became illegal. You missed that bit. Actually they continued to do business with the Nazis into the war. IBM helped out a lot too. And yes it did become illegal, that is why Prescott Bush and his company were charged under Trading with the Enemy act. In case you missed it. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 (edited) Actually they continued to do business with the Nazis into the war. IBM helped out a lot too. And yes it did become illegal, that is why Prescott Bush and his company were charged under Trading with the Enemy act. In case you missed it. Nope...not after America entered the war vs Germany. Remember, America was a neutral country until Pearl Harbor. What happened is that Bush's bank was suspected of holding Nazi deposits made before WW2. It was seized under the act...well because they could. No Nazi gold was however found...see Fritz Thyssen. Edited May 14, 2016 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Meanwhile...to get back on the topic that GH wants to disrupt... The Palestinian Cause was the pet project of the Mufti in order to lay claim to al-Aqsa just as much as it was a fascist endeavor to kill all the world's Jews. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Meanwhile...to get back on the topic that GH wants to disrupt... The Palestinian Cause was the pet project of the Mufti in order to lay claim to al-Aqsa just as much as it was a fascist endeavor to kill all the world's Jews. I am just following your flow. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 I am just following your flow. That's fine. I don't mind having normal conversations the way humans usually do. Anyways...anything to add re: Israel's many apparent war crimes? I think their biggest war crime as far as many are concerned is WINNING when the Arabs and their supporters were sure all those various times that they had a slam-dunk victory in the works against those darn Jews. So far no luck....so these supporters whine and cry about fair play and war crimes. Better luck next time, I guess....my only advice. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
kactus Posted May 14, 2016 Report Posted May 14, 2016 Israel won the war the Palestinian Arabs started. The Palestinian Arabs could always renege on the Khartoum Resolution of 1967 (The Three Noes) and make peace with Israel like Jordan and Egypt did if they want to further their way to having their own impoverished Islamic terror state. So f... what!? Israelis want to further their way to having their own impoverished judaism terror state.. Quote
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.