Zionist piracy

[Billy T]

The term for that is "putting words in someone's mouth." It's both fallacious and offensive: your post was a classic, overt troll. ...

Again wrong. I never said or even inferred that any words, which you did not say, came from you. So I did not put words in your mouth. All I did was to use about 90% of your same words and 100% of the logical structure of your text to show how unjust it was as an excuse for Israel's behavior.

I.e. instead of speaking of murder as your text did, I replaced "murder" with "torture"

Instead of "Israel" I substituted "CIA's rendition" to be excused by YOUR LOGIC,

and made no change in the sentence about "Others being directly responsible"

Thus, my modified repeat / paraphrase / of your words is just as "fallacious and offensive" (or not) as your original text.

 

[GeoffP]

The idea that apartheid is better than equal civil rights because the Jewish Israelis will fight for a Jewish state and create war rather than invest in peace, seems to me to be a pathetic denouement of the entire idea of Zionism.

Not exactly my point, but ok, I guess. :shrug:

You live in a state where both you and your wife who is apparently native American share the same civil rights after of a long history of native American struggle for equality. Should the native Americans have given up their struggle because the white man was incapable of seeing any coloured person as human?

Of course not; but you're also missing the tradition where the 'Native Americans' in your parallel were (and are) holding hostage every other native tradition on the basis of much-trumpeted but entirely hollow religious supremacy. The history prior to this period is a long, sad series of events completely in reverse to the present day, and worse: or else undermine the word pogrom. This is a fact that is foremost in the eyes of Israelis, and of Jewish people: Western and Eastern advantage-taking. And well it should be. I could as easily see this period in history - 60 years - as a blip compared to the 1400 that preceded it, and about which nothing is ever made. Should I? Perhaps the shoe is merely on the other foot; I disagree strongly with Israel's stance on the Palestinians, but why again should I forget the more than a millenium that preceded all this? I would have to do so, to support your one-state vantage from the complete safety of your present position. This strikes me as a stupid idea. And I should also forget your specific position on my prophesy of Palestinians prospects under the one-state proposition?

Since there can clearly be no living in peace together, the best thing is to live in peace - apart.

(Cordoba Cordoba.)

Didn't Americans fight a civil war over slavery? Was that irrational of them, to accord civil rights to black people? Why should Palestinians have lower expectations than black Americans?

Interesting proposition. Didn't Israelis fight their own civil war over societal slavery? Was that irrational of them, to afford civil rights to themselves? If they have gone too far now, then they have gone too far, but it means nothing as to the original issue.

Your pathetic attempts to hold the feet of the Righteous to the fires of accountability to fact are as ineffectual as they are misguided. Anything that deprives the Resistance of any advantage - especially, cheap rhetorical advantage on anonymous message boards - is obviously a crucial part of the Nazi Zionist Propaganda Strategy to undermine Palestine. S.A.M. is Palestine, and so any disagreement with S.A.M. is advocacy of racist genocide. S.A.M. is saving lives with this stuff, dammit, and so anyone that interferes in any way is literally a murderer.

Unless S.A.M. disagrees with me, the One Pure Avatar of Palestinian Justice. In that case, she's an agent of the Mossad/CIA/Neocons/Freemasons bent on destroying Arabs, Islam, human rights and cute puppies, and as such it is the duty of all moral people to oppose everything she says - especially if they're true.

Curses! All have found me out! Does anyone have a recipe for home-made moustachio wax? It's raining here and things seem a little drooped. I shall have to have my tophat shined, as well. A pox on these infernal expenses of infamy.

You may kiss your portfolio in GeoffP City goodbye, of course. It was bad enough that you were no Whig, but this we utterly cannot abide.

As a matter of general principle, you also forfeit your slaves and share of our gold reserves.

 

[quadraphonics]

The idea that apartheid is better than equal civil rights because the Jewish Israelis will fight for a Jewish state and create war rather than invest in peace, seems to me to be a pathetic denouement of the entire idea of Zionism.

Well, obviously, since the entire idea of Zionism is to enrich Jews by murder and theft. Jews are incapable of peacefully coexisting with others, and so cannot be tolerated anywhere.

Should the native Americans have given up their struggle because the white man was incapable of seeing any coloured person as human?

Indeed, the evils of the White Man are manifold and essential, and the Zionist Aggressor is simply one incarnation of them. America must be destroyed in order to achieve Justice, for the cruelty of The White Man knows no bounds.

Didn't Americans fight a civil war over slavery?

No, that was simply a contest between different factions of The White Man over who would dominate the land of the Native Americans, oppress the blacks, and exert hegemonic imperialist designs onto the rest of the world. The North was at least as racist as the South, and wished only to impose an even more dehumanizing industrial economy on the entirety of the country, complete with rapacious racist oppression. For the blacks, it meant only the replacement of plantation slavery with prison slavery, which is actually a step backwards. At least plantation slaves can marry and raise families.

 

[S.A.M.]

Didn't Israelis fight their own civil war over societal slavery?

No, because they immigrated to the land that a 2000 year old book told them is theirs and killed and dispossessed the natives to form a Jewish state. Most of them were Europeans, Europeans cannot fight a "civil war" in the Middle East against the native fellaheen anymore than the British could against Indians.

 

[Billy T]

... I don't know about demographic control; their population seems to have grown by the same order of magnitude as the Israeli population. Land rights though, clearly are nonexistent; in this, I think Israel is consistent with its neighbours, actually.

I think the Bedouin population is rapidly shrinking. Why do you think the converse?

Here is why I think birth rate is way below replacement level:

Pre-Isreal, at least 150,000 (but no one really knows) Bedouins nomadically followed the rains in both Sinai & Negev with their herds (mainly black goats, which are now nearly extinct). About the time of Israel's creation most of the many different tribal groups were only semi-nomadic in that during the part of the year with enough rain for crops and to locally feed their herd, each tribe lived in or near their crude village.

Now those that remain live mainly in one of three concentration camp cities. The BBC documentary focused on the largest one for more than half the program time. It only had about 20 or 25 school age children - all would easily fit in the school bus, which they waited more than an hour for, but it never came. - A few of the older ones decided to walk the ~5Km to school but most just went back home. Clearly these few kids will not make the next generation - I.e. Israel's Bedouin problem will soon cease to exist. Hitler never achieved his "Final Solution" but Israel will.

The trick to success was that Israel never killed any and keeps all news of their concentration camp cities as secrete as they can. I am nearly sure that the BBC documentary was clandestinely made - only one Israeli is seen in it. He was the armored bulldozer driver crushing recently constructed mud and stick huts/ homes built outside of the concentration camp cities. If he saw the camera, he did not leave the security of his bulldozer to cease it because half a dozen kids were stoning it.

---------------

On how the Bedouins are treated in other lands (and many who could did flee from Israel) I don't know. I suspect they are treated much like the Roma are in Europe - unwelcome transients only tolerated if clearly they are "just passing thru." Thus, I too doubt they have many rights, but think only Israel confines them to concentration camp cities.

 

[hypewaders]

Let's stop this right there: quadro has not, to my knowledge, made any such representation. You say the same thing about me, which is fine (depending on my mood that day ), though also untrue. But - I think both he and I - have pointed out that your inevitable 'final solution' is this one-state fantasy;

Mod Note: But there are differences between these opinions and how they are being expressed here. That is why I am suspending quadraphonics now.

the equally inevitable outcome is civil war and genocide, but every time I present this to you, the responses is an allegorical shrug, particularly as you feel the Palestinian/Arab side would be victorious. Yet you paint those who don't share your avid dislikes as extremists or apologists. It's a nonsense, and you know it, and you don't care, so far as I can tell.

(speaking as a member now) To conflate the One State plan (quadraphonics has further polluted the word "solution" for me again) with genocide is an example of vicious hasbara. Misrepresenting initiatives toward coexistence as stealthy preparations for ethnic cleansing or genocide is a very dirty pastime, that contributes to literally pollution of the geopolitical atmosphere. I can't sanction you as a moderator for that, but to see you advancing that sort of poisonous hasbara makes it hard to hold you in as high regard as I do, Geoff.

I don't know about demographic control; their population seems to have grown by the same order of magnitude as the Israeli population. Land rights though, clearly are nonexistent; in this, I think Israel is consistent with its neighbours, actually.

No, that isn't true: Israel's neighbors have not imposed a wholesale and forced re-allocation of land, based on ethnicity. Israel's nearest neighbors have a lot of faults, and are a poor role model for the One State resolution. The abolition of Israeli apartheid and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis should be seen from the outset as an improvement on and inspiration above the sorry state of affairs in the Levant and the Arab World.

 

[GeoffP]

Mod Note: But there are differences between these opinions and how they are being expressed here. That is why I am suspending quadraphonics now.

Hold on a second, if I may: specifically for what, though?

(speaking as a member now) To conflate the One State plan (quadraphonics has further polluted the word "solution" for me again) with genocide is an example of vicious hasbara. Misrepresenting initiatives toward coexistence as stealthy preparations for ethnic cleansing or genocide is a very dirty pastime, that contributes to literally pollution of the geopolitical atmosphere. I can't sanction you as a moderator for that, but to see you advancing that sort of poisonous hasbara makes it hard to hold you in as high regard as I do, Geoff.

Hype, you may hold me in whatever contempt you feel appropriate. But you cannot for a moment reasonably suppose that my perspective is unsupported, or that I actually characterize initiatives for coexistence as preparations for ethnic cleansing. If you feel this is the case, then present your evidence, or cite my opinion so that I may confirm, deny or refute. If you're referring to Sam's policy of "mash 'em together and let God sort 'em out", you may indeed count me out. The fact of the matter - and a fact undeniable - is that religious minorities don't do well in Islamic systems, whether from slow strangulation or outright pogrom. Is there any reason at all to think that this would not be the fate of the Jewish population, outnumbered, Palestinian Arab leadership still peddling the same old blood libels, in the event of one-state? Who, pray tell, is going to prevent it? And will they still be around in a hundred years? I see no reason for Jews to throw themselves on the mercy of their historic oppressors - the religious conservatives of East or West.

And that you should even consider my sanction for a very realistic point of view makes my regard for you stumble, also. If you wish to take such action - take it.

No, that isn't true: Israel's neighbors have not imposed a wholesale and forced re-allocation of land, based on ethnicity. Israel's nearest neighbors have a lot of faults, and are a poor role model for the One State resolution.

Hence, the problem, when the Palestinian leadership speaks longingly of the right of return to the 'good old days'.

The abolition of Israeli apartheid and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis should be seen from the outset as an improvement on and inspiration above the sorry state of affairs in the Levant and the Arab World.

And it would be, if I had any hope of this proposition being realistic.

I will retain my skepticism, sir; and you, your neutrality - or so it is to be hoped?

Mod Note: I'll briefly take up this off-topic discussion over here.

 

[quadraphonics]

Again wrong. I never said or even inferred that any words, which you did not say, came from you. So I did not put words in your mouth. All I did was to use about 90% of your same words and 100% of the logical structure of your text to show how unjust it was as an excuse for Israel's behavior.

I.e. instead of speaking of murder as your text did, I replaced "murder" with "torture"

Instead of "Israel" I substituted "CIA's rendition" to be excused by YOUR LOGIC,

and made no change in the sentence about "Others being directly responsible"

Thus, my modified repeat / paraphrase / of your words is just as "fallacious and offensive" (or not) as your original text.

I've already received 2 infractions for responding to your insulting behavior towards me in kind, so understand my seriousness when I tell you to take your infantile refusals to own up to what your are clearly doing, and shove them up your ass.

Mod Note: Take a breather, quadraphonics.

 

[iceaura]

Note the selectiveness of the causes that are complained about in the world- you can easily find a major Syrian transgression against Lebanon for every transgression Israel's ever caused, and Syria has far outdone Israel in deaths and disappearances,

That isn't true, even just in Lebanon - Israel occupied Lebanon for almost twenty years, imposing martial law and laying mines all over the place - nothing Syria ahs done comes close to that.

BTW any updates on the aid that was sent? Sounds like for the most part it was all crap

This kind of shit is what elicits impatience and orneryness, gets you called an Israeli apologist.

No, there has been no reliable independent information about much of anything in this event, as yet. If you reject the eyewitness accounts, you are left with Isreali controlled propaganda feed - selected and edited video, planted disinformation from all directions of the compass, the standard schtick.

So what do you mean by "sounds like for the most part"? Who are you listening to? Allow me to repeat the earlier statement: nothing from official Israeli military sources is reliable. If you can't discount for the source, you are better off ignoring it and awaiting the involvement of reputable reporters or informants.

. Most of the Palestinians did not even have legal ownership and were squatters for generations

There is no such thing as "squatters for generations".

And to paraphrase my mother and yours, about "found" stuff: you know for sure who didn't own it, right? But took it anyway?
{some stuff removed, out of date}

- - - Damn, this is disappointing. What is it about Israel that fogs the obvious? We have people identifying Israel's annexation of the "spoils of war" as a defense?! A frigging justification? We have people defending Israeli commando raids as enforcement of law, and simultaneously justifying the consequential shootings as legitimate responses to the commandos being attacked with clubs as they boarded the ship - even the term "self-defense" being applied to shootings of crew by armed assailants of a ship on the open ocean? That's not how law is enforced, where law is respected - not that anyone involved had jurisdiction.

 

[Billy T]

... Flail away, but don't think you aren't showing your colors. You are never going to be able to bitch about anything SAM posts again, at this rate.
And after Hype, now Billy - two of the most gently spoken posters on this forum? What the hell is your problem - drugs? GF dump your tantum-throwing ass? Go take a shower or something, you're being ridiculous.

Thanks for the defense. I never resort to vulgarities or name calling. In part because I am from a generation where that was not done - at least not by anyone educated; which bring me to the main reason for not doing so:

To need to resort to that is a clear reflection on your own lack of intelligence and creativity.

For example, in the current exchange with quad, I merely used his own words with minor substitution and no change in his logical structure to show how silly he was being in his defense of Israel - His noting that others (essentially Israel's agent) had actually done the mass murders.

I.e. his logic with "CIA rendition" replacing "Israel" and "torture" replacing "murder" lets the CIA duck responsibility just as well as his excuse for Israel did.

I think this more creative and forceful than calling him a @#%* or even a &*## $%#@#$ does, but perhaps it just because I am old that I hold this POV.

 

[spidergoat]

How constructive is it to portray the pursuit of a two-state solution as the continuation of European occupation of Palestine? Such a sentiment cannot result in a peaceful resolution- in the only manner that has been seriously considered by both parties in recent history.

 

[Billy T]

How constructive is it to portray the pursuit of a two-state solution as the continuation of European occupation of Palestine? Such a sentiment cannot result in a peaceful resolution- in the only manner that has been seriously considered by both parties in recent history.

I don't understand your post -especially the part I made bold; but want to note there are other factors, IMHO, that any "two state" solution will need to be stable. I.e. complete physical separation with both secure for at least two generations. - I.e. Israel keeps a weapons blockade in effect ~ 40 years more but drops it current High-Kill-Ratio choice in favor of very effective defense and border control. (border fence and mine field, backed up by "killer trained " dogs etc. as I described)

 

[GeoffP]

Regrettable but necessary, I think.

 

[spidergoat]

I don't understand your post -especially the part I made bold; but want to note there are other factors, IMHO, that any "two state" solution will need to be stable. I.e. complete physical separation with both secure for at least two generations. - I.e. Israel keeps a weapons blockade in effect ~ 40 years more but drops it current High-Kill-Ratio choice in favor of very effective defense and border control. (border fence and mine field, backed up by "killer trained " dogs etc. as I described)

I see the logic in your reasoning, but not every problem can be solved with engineering. Perhaps after decades and things have settled down, both states might want to form a union. I don't see the point, but it could happen.

 

[Billy T]

... Perhaps after decades and things have settled down, both states might want to form a union. I don't see the point, but it could happen.

Do you see any indications that things are "settling down"? We have waited 60 years for that to happen, but the mutual hate and killing has only increased.

Do your really think Mr. Spock could ever have a minor Hamas official living across the street from him? I don't. Both must securely die in their beds of old age in completely separated societies before one can even imagine one unified country or genuine peace between two separate ones.

 

[GeoffP]

Agreed, I think.

 

[ElectricFetus]

- - - Damn, this is disappointing. What is it about Israel that fogs the obvious? We have people identifying Israel's annexation of the "spoils of war" as a defense?! A frigging justification?

Well yeah, the Arabs attacked with all intent to "push the Jews into the sea", heck the Arab states after the formation of Israel kicked out almost all their Jews and took all their property and money, the Jews in Arab states owned 3 times the land area of Israel, I don't see you complaining about that injustice. If the Arab states had put the Palestinians on the land they kicked the Jews off of instead of putting the Palestinians in concentration camps and massacring them on a regular basis that few care about because Israel is not doing it, then this whole problem would have been solved decades ago.

I see the logic in your reasoning, but not every problem can be solved with engineering. Perhaps after decades and things have settled down, both states might want to form a union. I don't see the point, but it could happen.

Sure with Gaza, but what about the west bank?

 

[Billy T]

... Arab states after the formation of Israel kicked out almost all their Jews and took all their property and money, the Jews in Arab states owned 3 times the land area of Israel, ...

A very interesting claim. First time I have heard it. Can you document any of it? What states were the major expellers of Jews?

How do you correct for the fact Israel was making it nearly a moral duty of Jews to migrate to Israel? - I.e. When Isaac left country X, how do you know he was "expelled" instead of responding to Israel's appeal for him to move to Israel?

How were they expelled? I.e. were they herded onto trucks and driven to the border, or what? Are there any photos of this forced expelling? They exist even in the case of Nazi loading Jews onto trains and the Nazis had better control of photos etc than most (all I bet) of the Arab states near Israel so some photos of the forced expulsion should exist (assuming it did happen).

 

[S.A.M.]

Except for the expulsion of 25000 Jews in 1956 from Egypt following the Suez crisis and Lavon affair, I seriously doubt all claims of expulsion of Jews from Arab lands. Most of the Jews in India [>90%] also left the country and they had no reason to, other than aliyah. The movement of Jews from Arab lands happened gradually, over a long period of over a decade and does not resemble any expulsion. Of course, in the Zionist narrative they are all multimillionaires with vast holdings of land and property. In truth the Mizrahi have always been treated like a lower class in Israel from the very beginning.

 

[pjdude1219]

A very interesting claim. First time I have heard it. Can you document any of it? What states were the major expellers of Jews?

How do you correct for the fact Israel was making it nearly a moral duty of Jews to migrate to Israel? - I.e. When Isaac left country X, how do you know he was "expelled" instead of responding to Israel's appeal for him to move to Israel?

How were they expelled? I.e. were they herded onto trucks and driven to the border, or what? Are there any photos of this forced expelling? They exist even in the case of Nazi loading Jews onto trains and the Nazis had better control of photos etc than most (all I bet) of the Arab states near Israel so some photos of the forced expulsion should exist (assuming it did happen).

do you love how people like electric use that to justify what Israel did to the palestinians even though it was in response to it?