Hating a way of life

[KrustyKidd]

The Arabs/ Muslims just want to be left to lead their own lives in their own chosen way.

Yes, and their subjegated people had better like it too as they have no choice. They get to have free press there just like here as long as it supports the view of the ruling regime right? The Muslims have so much say in their day to day lives. How in the world do you know what these repressed and silenced people realy want? Because a ruthless (pick one) mullah, dictator, terrorist leader, terrorist leader's thugs, chanting mob told you?

As for Israel, other than the Palestinians, whom Syria, Jordan, Egypt and others seem more intent on depriving of a home than Israel does, which countries do they treaten in the ME? Somebody provide some evidence that Israel is directly responsible for the turmoil that occurs there throughout the region.

Comon, show me how other than the Palestinian terrorist who killed Jewish women and children who ended up in a wheelchair, (and still preaches for others to do the same) Israel threatens Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Syria (heck, if I were Syria and seriously thought for a second that Israel would launch a WMD at me, I'd make some serious peace immediately so I guess they really don't feel all that threatened.)

[Argus]

It was money from the USA that allowed them to arm themselves. It was America's unending vetoes that allowed Israel to commit its atrocities and human rights abuses without taking responsibility.

It was money from the USA that allowed them to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from the psychotic Muslim world intent on bringing about another Holocaust.

I have to wonder whether there would be many tears among the people who are such vocal critics of Israel if they all were overrun and slaughtered. I suspect it would amount to "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves." Most of the bigger critics of Israel are anti-Semites by any real measure of the word.

[Black Dog]

Somebody provide some evidence that Israel is directly responsible for the turmoil that occurs there throughout the region.

The Occupation and colonization of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the resulting the economic and political disparity between Israelis and the people they occupy is the primary source of conflict in the region today.

End the occupation and the bulk of the violence will end with it.

It was money from the USA that allowed them to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from the psychotic Muslim world intent on bringing about another Holocaust.

Argus' racism rears its ugly head again. Funny how someone can spout such bilge, and yet be so ready to play the race card against his opponents. Hypocrite.

What's more, the above is also a stunning display of historical ignorance. The U.S.'s patronage of Israel did not arise out of the goodness of the American's hearts, but as a bulwark to Soviet influences and the rise of Arab nationalism. To imply otherwise is naive at best and dishonest at worst.

I have to wonder whether there would be many tears among the people who are such vocal critics of Israel if they all were overrun and slaughtered. I suspect it would amount to "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves." Most of the bigger critics of Israel are anti-Semites by any real measure of the word.

I can understand this pathetic attempt to smear any oponnents of Israeli policy: after all, the arguments presented by its suporters are so weak that invoking the spectre of the Holocaust is the only trick they have. But really, Argus, if you're going to accuse people of anti-semetism, why not produce an example? After all, this isn't the first time you've dragged that particular straw man out without any supporting evidence: maybe now you'll actually step up and back it up?

[Guest LLL]

I have to wonder whether there would be many tears among the people who are such vocal critics of Israel if they all were overrun and slaughtered. I suspect it would amount to "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves." Most of the bigger critics of Israel are anti-Semites by any real measure of the word.

I can understand this pathetic attempt to smear any oponnents of Israeli policy: after all, the arguments presented by its suporters are so weak that invoking the spectre of the Holocaust is the only trick they have. But really, Argus, if you're going to accuse people of anti-semetism, why not produce an example? After all, this isn't the first time you've dragged that particular straw man out without any supporting evidence: maybe now you'll actually step up and back it up?

Whenever the Palestinians decide to blow up a bunch of Jewish children in ice cream parlors, discos, playgrounds etc. ........ you can hear it everywhere ... "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves."

Yet when one Palestinian child gets accidently injured by a Jewish soldier all hell breaks loose.

[Black Dog]

Whenever the Palestinians decide to blow up a bunch of Jewish children in ice cream parlors, discos, playgrounds etc. ........ you can hear it everywhere ... "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves."

If you hear it everywhere, it shouldn't be too hard to provide a citation or an example. I call bullshit on you.

Yet when one Palestinian child gets accidently injured by a Jewish soldier all hell breaks loose.

How about seven Palestinians killed, six wounded while picking strawberries

[Guest LLL]

If you hear it everywhere, it shouldn't be too hard to provide a citation or an example. I call bullshit on you.

Don't you read a newspaper? I'm not pulling up sites for the obvious.

BTW, there was a Tsunami recently.

[Black Dog]

If you hear it everywhere, it shouldn't be too hard to provide a citation or an example. I call bullshit on you.

Don't you read a newspaper? I'm not pulling up sites for the obvious.

Yes, I do read the newspapers. And I've never seen the sentiment you described expressed anywhere. So, unless you can provide some support for your statement (just to refresh your memory, that was:

Whenever the Palestinians decide to blow up a bunch of Jewish children in ice cream parlors, discos, playgrounds etc. ........ you can hear it everywhere ... "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves."

), I'm forced to conclude you're either 1) Full of shit or 2) just ignorant.

Which is it?

(And I won't even get into the problematic nature of your statement's language and struture)

BTW, there was a Tsunami recently.

No kidding. What's that got to do with the subject at hand?

[Guest LLL]

=Black Dog,Jan 5 2005, 07:44 PM]

Yes, I do read the newspapers. And I've never seen the sentiment you described expressed anywhere. So, unless you can provide some support for your statement  I'm forced to conclude you're either 1) Full of shit or 2) just ignorant.

Which is it?

(And I won't even get into the problematic nature of your statement's language and struture)

I refer you to every UN resolution involving Israel. I refer you to every discussion regarding root causes. Please don't bother discussing this if you just want to play dumb. It's boring.

Or are you one of many who upon reading about Jewish children being targeted and killed just casually shrug their shoulders and say: "But that's the only way that those poor Palestinians can pay back the Jews." ............. I feel like throwing up everytime I hear that, and I've heard it hundreds of times.

Excuse me ...........

I'm back.

And also, please, don't lecture me on sentence structure. I've seen nothing in your posts that suggests that you have a better handle on the English language than I do. People who DO have a golden typing finger never put down other posters on their english skills ... so if you want to pretend superiority ... study your superiors.

Re the Tsunami ... you appear to not be really up on the news ... so I thought you might like to know. It's a big story.

[KrustyKidd]

Black Dog being extremely selective in his guoting. So selective that he is able to change the question I proposed.

Somebody provide some evidence that Israel is directly responsible for the turmoil that occurs there throughout the region.

He then goes onto show us how Lucifer (AKA Israel) is responsible for the palestinians etc etc ad nausium. The real question was a bit more challenging however;

As for Israel, other than the Palestinians, whom Syria, Jordan, Egypt and others seem more intent on depriving of a home than Israel does, which countries do they treaten in the ME? Somebody provide some evidence that Israel is directly responsible for the turmoil that occurs there throughout the region.

Hmmm. Black Dog, you avoided the question, as the Left always does. By region, I don't mean the isolated conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis but how the whole region is living in fear of the Israelis. Show me what Israel has done to Saudi Arabia, Yemen, iran and on and on. We all know that the Israelis and Palestinians have their problem. Now, if you could, take that problem in your imagination and solve it somehow. Then, show me how Israel would be a threat to any nation.

[caesar]

Yes, and their subjegated people had better like it too as they have no choice. They get to have free press there just like here as long as it supports the view of the ruling regime right? The Muslims have so much say in their day to day lives. How in the world do you know what these repressed and silenced people realy want? Because a ruthless (pick one) mullah, dictator, terrorist leader, terrorist leader's thugs, chanting mob told you?

So much better to have a foreigner like Bush to control their lives eh (or end them)

[Black Dog]

I refer you to every UN resolution involving Israel. I refer you to every discussion regarding root causes. Please don't bother discussing this if you just want to play dumb. It's boring.

I'm pretty sur eyou'r enot playing dumb (if so, you deserve an Oscar). Your statement indicated widespread and popular antisemetism in society at large. When questioned, you replied that this could be proven by "reading the newspaper", implying widespread antisemetism in the mainstream press. If you're now talking about UN resolutions, please refer me to the specific resolution containing the phrase "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves." Similarily, discussion of "root causes" is, more often than not, applied to give context to events, not excuse actions as you seem to be believe.

If you can't back up your statement, then maybe you should refrain from making it in the first place instead of trying to squirm away.

Or are you one of many who upon reading about Jewish children being targeted and killed just casually shrug their shoulders and say: "But that's the only way that those poor Palestinians can pay back the Jews." ............. I feel like throwing up everytime I hear that, and I've heard it hundreds of times.

Ad hominem, not to mention a transparent plea to emotions (I certainly don't see you shedding any tears for the innumerable Palestinian children killed by the IDF).

And also, please, don't lecture me on sentence structure. I've seen nothing in your posts that suggests that you have a better handle on the English language than I do. People who DO have a golden typing finger never put down other posters on their english skills ... so if you want to pretend superiority ... study your superiors.

I was referring of course to the construction of your statement which, again, referred only to Jewish children being targeted in "ice cream parlors, discos, playgrounds etc" (one wonders what Israeli children are doing in discos in the first place). It's a transparent appeal to emotion. And it's misleading.

Re the Tsunami ... you appear to not be really up on the news ... so I thought you might like to know. It's a big story.

How is the tsunami relevant? You're obfuscating.

Hmmm. Black Dog, you avoided the question, as the Left always does. By region, I don't mean the isolated conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis but how the whole region is living in fear of the Israelis. Show me what Israel has done to Saudi Arabia, Yemen, iran and on and on. 

Well to begin, Yemen and Iran have never participated in any Arab-Israeli conflicts (Iranians not being Arabs and all). As for how the whle region is living in fear of the Israelis, I don't know if they are neccesarily. However, given the facts: Israel has the fourth-largest military in the world, the backing of the world's most powerful nation, is known to possess a large arsenal of nuclear weapons and, through its continued occupation and colonization of territories illegaly seized after the Six Day War (a war it began), has demonstratable territorial ambitions, who wouldn't be nervous?

We all know that the Israelis and Palestinians have their problem. Now, if you could, take that problem in your imagination and solve it somehow. Then, show me how Israel would be a threat to any nation.

Easy: end the occupation. Dismantle the settlements, and work with the Palestinians to develop a viable palestinian state. However, that kind of peace is not in Israel's plans for the region.

[KrustyKidd]

We all know that the Israelis and Palestinians have their problem. Now, if you could, take that problem in your imagination and solve it somehow. Then, show me how Israel would be a threat to any nation.

BD reply

Easy: end the occupation. Dismantle the settlements, and work with the Palestinians to develop a viable palestinian state. However, that kind of peace is not in Israel's plans for the region.

Sorry if that was worded wrong, it is the same question we got mixed up a few posts ago. Herre, we will try it like this;

If the Palestinians made peace with Israel to both parties mutual satisfaction, how would this affect the physical political greography of the Middle East?

I mean, they made peace with five million Arabs that live within a stones throw of them. How does this bring increased security and a better life to the other 295 Million Arabs in the region? Those 295 million are the ones who at this moment blame their hard luck on Israel, who only have a problem with the Palestinians.

Kind of like the world blaming famine, war, disease and all on Canada because we have not settled our land claims with the Aborigionals.

[Black Dog]

If the Palestinians made peace with Israel to both parties mutual satisfaction, how would this affect the physical political greography of the Middle East?

That would really depend on the nature of the settlement, wouldn't it? I think such speculation is too academic to be of any use.

I mean, they made peace with five million Arabs that live within a stones throw of them. How does this bring increased security and a better life to the other 295 Million Arabs in the region? Those 295 million are the ones who at this moment blame their hard luck on Israel, who only have a problem with the Palestinians.

Well, I would expect the same one's who currently scapegoat the Zionists wold continue to do so. Sixty years of eminity and bad blood won't go away with an equitable solution to the occupation problem. However, that dosn't mean an equitable solution should not be a goal.

Indeed, a viable, democratic Palestinian state would serve as example for the rest of the region and would give reformers some additional ammunition for their cause. However, just because Arab rulers like to blame Israel for all their problems, doesn't mean the true causes will end with the occupation. So long as the west supports corrupt and tyrranical regimes in the name of stability, the Arab/Muslim world will still have more than its share of problems.

[Guest LLL]

Your statement indicated widespread and popular antisemetism in society at large. When questioned, you replied that this could be proven by "reading the newspaper", implying widespread antisemetism in the mainstream press. If you're now talking about UN ...........

I don't know how widespread anti-semitism is in society at large, but what I DO know is that your average newspaper reader will nod in agreement to Kofi Annan's insistence that atrocities committed on children in Israel and Palestine are equal in value BECAUSE THE F'ING MEDIA NEVER LAUGHS ITS ASS OFF WHENEVER HE GETS ON ONE OF THOSE RANTS.

Annan NEVER forgets to mention that Jews kill Palestinian children too whenever an ice cream parlor full of Jewish children is blown up. Haven't you noticed? The same way he compares the horrible events of Beslan, 911 and the beheading of civilians to the incidens in Abu Ghraib.

What a nut case!

But he IS an anti-semite and anti-white, so I do understand why he does that.

It's the newspapers that nauseate me, for not explaining the difference to the average reader.

Anne Coulter had it right when she said that she would have preferred that Timothy McVeigh had targeted the NY Times.

Have you read her new book, "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)", yet? The best! A masterpiece! Where can I send you a copy?

I certainly don't see you shedding any tears for the innumerable Palestinian children killed by the IDF.

You sound like Kofi Annan here. Ad hominem, not to mention a transparently fake plea to emotions, if I ever saw one.

[Black Dog]

I don't know how widespread anti-semitism is in society at large, but what I DO know is that your average newspaper reader will nod in agreement to Kofi Annan's insistence that atrocities committed on children in Israel and Palestine are equal in value BECAUSE THE F'ING MEDIA NEVER LAUGHS ITS ASS OFF WHENEVER HE GETS ON ONE OF THOSE RANTS.

Again: what are you basing this on? Surely to god, if this problem were so extensive, you'd have absolutely no trouble finding a citation. So pretty please with sugar on top, provide an example.

Annan NEVER forgets to mention that Jews kill Palestinian children too whenever an ice cream parlor full of Jewish children is blown up. Haven't you noticed? The same way he compares the horrible events of Beslan, 911 and the beheading of civilians to the incidens in Abu Ghraib.

What a nut case!

If that is indeed the case, so what? Israelis do kill Palestinian children (at a far brisker clip than their Hamas counterparts). Or did you not read the article I posted about the Palestinian kids picking strawberries who were killed by an IDF tank shell?

Is it the moral equivalence between the killings of innocents that bothers you? Or is it the fact that you don't like to see Israel's crimes brought into the light?

But he IS an anti-semite and anti-white, so I do understand why he does that.

Prove either of these statements.

It's the newspapers that nauseate me, for not explaining the difference to the average reader.

Perhaps you could explain the difference? Is it that the Palestinian kids had it coming?

Anne Coulter had it right when she said that she would have preferred that Timothy McVeigh had targeted the NY Times.

Have you read her new book, "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)", yet? The best! A masterpiece! Where can I send you a copy?

Ann Coulter is a raving idiot. Her books aren't worth the paper their printed on and no one of consequence considers her to be anything but a clown. The fact you cite her work as "the best" speaks volumes.

You sound like Kofi Annan here. Ad hominem, not to mention a transparently fake plea to emotions, if I ever saw one.

That’s cute: you learned how to cut and paste.

If you came to debate, please do so. But if you're simply going to regurgitate what I've written and not address the points I made, what are you doing here?

[I miss Reagan]

Ann Coulter is a raving idiot. Her books aren't worth the paper their printed on and *snotty fake british acent*no one of consequence considers her to be anything but a clown.

Ann Coulter's intended hyperbole is apperently having it's desired effect. Pissing off the left. Evidently millions of inconsequential people enjoy her books which consistently make it to #1 the NY times.

[Black Dog]

Ann Coulter is a raving idiot. Her books aren't worth the paper their printed on and *snotty fake british acent*no one of consequence considers her to be anything but a clown.

Ann Coulter's intended hyperbole is apperently having it's desired effect. Pissing off the left. Evidently millions of inconsequential people enjoy her books which consistently make it to #1 the NY times.

Along with the likes of Michael Moore.

What's your point?

[I miss Reagan]

I'm not sure that's his mission, although I'm sure he gets enjoyment from it. I think he's more into manipulating the uneducated and easily persuaded. Colter's work, at least, takes some basic political understanding to enjoy it fully.

[Guest LLL]

I miss Reagan,

Did I hear you say that Black Dog said that Ann Coulter has a snotty fake british accent?

Only if it's from that well known British outpost called the US of A.

[I miss Reagan]

Hi LLL, no I'm sorry BD did not put that in. It was merely my imagination projecting a snotty fake british accent on the "no one of consequence considers her to be anything but a clown" comment.

[Big Blue Machine]

Why doesn't Michael Moore run for president. He complains about whats wrong with America, but yet he doesn't offer solutions to them. If he wants to fix America, he should run for president.

He says he's like a average joe, but he lives in a 1.2 million house and actually gets tax cuts from Bush. Does this sound like an average joe to you?

[I miss Reagan]

I heard Moore say that he gets a lot of his funding from Canada.

Anybody ever listen to Michael Savage? There's a guy who the CRTC would never let through...

[KrustyKidd]

That would really depend on the nature of the settlement, wouldn't it? I think such speculation is too academic to be of any use.

I think the nature of the settlement was dictated in the hypothetical question which was the lead up top my point.

If the Palestinians made peace with Israel to both parties mutual satisfaction, how would this affect the physical political greography of the Middle East?

That being the both sides being happy with the settlement in whatever form it took place. The speculation is of use simply to show you that if this took place, only the problem between the Palestinians and the Israelis would dissappear.

BD

Well, I would expect the same one's who currently scapegoat the Zionists wold continue to do so.

(if and when a peace agreement is made)

So therefore, you admit that those who hate Israel would continue to do so simply because they exist, reguardless of the Palestinian issue. Hence, Israel must have done something to them, or threaten them in some way shape or form. What is that Black Dog? How does Israel threaten the Arabs of the Middle East who are not Palestinians?

Sixty years of eminity and bad blood won't go away with an equitable solution to the occupation problem.

So between blaming the Tsami on Israeli nuclear testing, the Palestinian issue (which Arab countries do less to solve and help than Israel does) how is Israel threatening anybody? What you and the Arabs seem to be on about is the equivilent of Canada making continual war on South Africa for stealing white farmers land. It makes sense to some and it does not make sense to others, but our foreign policy would be dictated by the percieved unfafirness to a majority race issue.

Now, other than the border despute with five million Palestinians, how does Israel threaten the other 295 million people of the Middle East?

[Guest LLL]

I don't know how widespread anti-semitism is in society at large, but what I DO know is that your average newspaper reader will nod in agreement to Kofi Annan's insistence that atrocities committed on children in Israel and Palestine are equal in value BECAUSE THE F'ING MEDIA NEVER LAUGHS ITS ASS OFF WHENEVER HE GETS ON ONE OF THOSE RANTS.

Again: what are you basing this on? Surely to god, if this problem were so extensive, you'd have absolutely no trouble finding a citation. So pretty please with sugar on top, provide an example.

Annan NEVER forgets to mention that Jews kill Palestinian children too whenever an ice cream parlor full of Jewish children is blown up. Haven't you noticed? The same way he compares the horrible events of Beslan, 911 and the beheading of civilians to the incidens in Abu Ghraib.

What a nut case!

If that is indeed the case, so what? Israelis do kill Palestinian children (at a far brisker clip than their Hamas counterparts). Or did you not read the article I posted about the Palestinian kids picking strawberries who were killed by an IDF tank shell?

Is it the moral equivalence between the killings of innocents that bothers you? Or is it the fact that you don't like to see Israel's crimes brought into the light?

But he IS an anti-semite and anti-white, so I do understand why he does that.

Prove either of these statements.

It's the newspapers that nauseate me, for not explaining the difference to the average reader.

Perhaps you could explain the difference? Is it that the Palestinian kids had it coming?

Anne Coulter had it right when she said that she would have preferred that Timothy McVeigh had targeted the NY Times.

Have you read her new book, "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)", yet? The best! A masterpiece! Where can I send you a copy?

Ann Coulter is a raving idiot. Her books aren't worth the paper their printed on and no one of consequence considers her to be anything but a clown. The fact you cite her work as "the best" speaks volumes.

You sound like Kofi Annan here. Ad hominem, not to mention a transparently fake plea to emotions, if I ever saw one.

That’s cute: you learned how to cut and paste.

If you came to debate, please do so. But if you're simply going to regurgitate what I've written and not address the points I made, what are you doing here?

I nodded off several times while trying to decide how to answer the post above. And every time I'd nod off I'd fall into the same dream, that I was in a classroom, full of high schoolers.

Are you a high school teacher, Black Dog?

That would explain my dream.

You know, Black Dog, I think you'd make an excellent high school teacher.

Cheerio!

[Argus]

Somebody provide some evidence that Israel is directly responsible for the turmoil that occurs there throughout the region.

The Occupation and colonization of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the resulting the economic and political disparity between Israelis and the people they occupy is the primary source of conflict in the region today.

Nonsense. Uneducated sputtering. The reason for the turmoil is the hatred of the Arabs, their religious fanaticism, the corruption, incompetence and stupidity of their leaders, and their continued miltary and economic attacks on the Israelis. The economic disparity between the Israelis and Palestinians? What Marxist drivel is this?

It was money from the USA that allowed them to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from the psychotic Muslim world intent on bringing about another Holocaust.

Argus' racism rears its ugly head again. Funny how someone can spout such bilge, and yet be so ready to play the race card against his opponents. Hypocrite.

I know this might confuse you, as you apparently know virtually nothing about race (or anything else), but there really is no racial difference between the Arabs and most Israelis. They are both Semitic people.

What's more, the above is also a stunning display of historical ignorance.  The U.S.'s patronage of Israel did not arise out of the goodness of the American's hearts, but as a bulwark to Soviet influences and the rise of Arab nationalism.

Certainly the Americans backed Israel in part because it was a democratic bullwark against the mostly pro soviet Arab states in the middle east. But the US backed Israel out of guilt over allowing the Holocaust to happen, and then, in large part, because they were friends and allies. There was no doubt that Soviet aid would have allowed the Arab states around Israel to overrun them if the US had not supported Israel. Any sane person would have agreed that Israel deserved out support. Then again, anti-semites aren't neccesarily sane, except by medical standards.

I have to wonder whether there would be many tears among the people who are such vocal critics of Israel if they all were overrun and slaughtered. I suspect it would amount to "tsk tsk, oh well, those Jews brought it on themselves." Most of the bigger critics of Israel are anti-Semites by any real measure of the word.

I can understand this pathetic attempt to smear any oponnents of Israeli policy: after all, the arguments presented by its suporters are so weak that invoking the spectre of the Holocaust is the only trick they have. But really, Argus, if you're going to accuse people of anti-semetism, why not produce an example? After all, this isn't the first time you've dragged that particular straw man out without any supporting evidence: maybe now you'll actually step up and back it up?

I think the evidence speaks for itself. There are plenty of reasons to judge Israeli policies badly. But every single one of them calls for judging Arab and Palestinians policies and actions worse. Yet, how odd, so many vocal opponents of Israel have not one single solitary critical word to say against the Arabs or the Palestinians.

I recall when Western media in Israel made a big fuss a year or so ago because the Israelis had banned a Palestinian cameraman working for one of the western news outfits. They protested, they did stories on the injustice, they even tried to disrupt some news conferences. They were protesting in favour of freedom of the press, after all, so it was out of principal.

Funny thing was, as came out later, Israeli reporters are banned from the Palestinian territories by the PLO under threat of death of caught. No protest about that. None.

So what do we call this disgusting display of one-sidededness when it obviously wasn't over principals at all? What excuse did they really have? Near total ignorance, perhaps.

So I will allow that the most virulent critics of Israel, who never criticise the Arabs for the same things they sneer at the Israelis over aren't all anti-semites. Some are just incredibly stupid and ignorant and shallow.