JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags general discussion , Israel issues , Israel-Palestine conflict , Palestine issues , US-Israel relations

Closed Thread
Old 6th November 2012, 02:01 AM   #8841
Doctor Evil
Master Poster
 
Doctor Evil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Back home
Posts: 2,006
Originally Posted by HoverBoarder View Post
Why would no one in Israel be opposed to peace negotiations?
Correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling that by asking why you really mean whether. In any case I will answer both.

When I said that no one is opposed to peace negotiations I was generalizing. What I meant was to say that all the major parties officially support negotiations whose goal is a two state solution. If you look closely you may find some parties which do not state that, such as 'The Jewish Home' who do not believe in negotiations, but they are in the minority.

The reason why somewhat right wing parties are in favor of negotiations, at least in principle, is simple, most of the Israeli public still see a two state solutuon as the most likely solution of the conflict. (That assumes that a solution is possible.) At the same time a lot of people do not think that this is a particularly good time for negotiations, but this is beside the point, and I have no time to expand on it.


Originally Posted by HoverBoarder View Post
The Israelis have the upper hand in terms of settlement expansion, varying rights based on race, full control over borders, etc. And for many on the right in Israel, especially Likud, there has been reluctance to engage in negotiations and possibly threaten their ability to continue construction expansion and their ability to retain legal preferential treatment based on race.

That is a calculus that is not shared by many on the left and middle in Israel. For them, the increased stability, predictability, and reduction of tensions that could develop as a result of negotiations are more in Israel's National security and economic interests.
I am part of the left in Israel, and in the upcoming election I will again try to convince my family and friends not to vote for Bibi. Yet I believe that your first paragraph is simply not true. It has been Bibi official policy that he would welcome talks without preconditions. (A reminder, Bibi negotiated with Arafat in his previous stint as PM.) At the same time it was Abbas who required various conditions before talks start. Bibi was even forced to greatly reduce settlement construction for a period and Abbas still refused to negotiate. As a result it was easy for Bibi present himself as moderate, and shift the political discussion in Israel to other topics.

By the way, I think that both Bibi and Abbas are not interested in negotiations at this time because i) it is not clear that Abbas has a claim to represent all Palestinians and ii) no current Israeli leader will match the offer Olmert gave to Abbas four years ago, and Abbas did not accept the offer at the time. This is all maneuvering to make the other side bad, without any substance.
__________________
"ut biberent, quando esse nollent " (if they will not eat, then they will drink) -- Publius Claudius Pulcher

"In this universe, effect follows cause. I've complained about it but ... " -- House
Doctor Evil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 04:33 AM   #8842
John Mekki
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 537
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
Who, me?
Excellent to condemn Ahmadinejad for what he said about Isreal.
Wondering why the same people do not say a heck about this:

When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "the president of the United States directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way."[161]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_an...ss_destruction

President George W Bush has refused to rule out a nuclear strike on Iran as diplomats from the world's major powers met to respond to Teheran's defiance over its atomic programme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-on-Iran.html

Ah!!
I am sure that the people who strongly condemning Ahmadinejad for his harsh words against Israel will immediately ask for the arrest of Mr. Bush and bring him to The Hague for call for genocide, threatened crimes against humanity or however you want to call threatening a nuclear strike against a nation that does not have nukes.
John Mekki is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 05:42 AM   #8843
bit_pattern
Illuminator
 
bit_pattern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,384
**** Israel!
__________________
"You are the epitome of the 'pigeon playing chess'. No matter how good I am at chess, you are just going to knock the pieces over, **** on the board and strut around like you've won something"

"In this political climate, all of science is vulnerable to ideological attack when reality disagrees with political beliefs."
bit_pattern is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 09:05 AM   #8844
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 53,929
Originally Posted by John Mekki View Post
Excellent to condemn Ahmadinejad for what he said about Isreal.
Wondering why the same people do not say a heck about this:

When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "the president of the United States directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way."[161]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_an...ss_destruction

President George W Bush has refused to rule out a nuclear strike on Iran as diplomats from the world's major powers met to respond to Teheran's defiance over its atomic programme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-on-Iran.html

Ah!!
I am sure that the people who strongly condemning Ahmadinejad for his harsh words against Israel will immediately ask for the arrest of Mr. Bush and bring him to The Hague for call for genocide, threatened crimes against humanity or however you want to call threatening a nuclear strike against a nation that does not have nukes.
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 10:13 AM   #8845
McHrozni
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,835
Originally Posted by John Mekki View Post
Excellent to condemn Ahmadinejad for what he said about Isreal.
Wondering why the same people do not say a heck about this:

When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "the president of the United States directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way."[161]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_an...ss_destruction

President George W Bush has refused to rule out a nuclear strike on Iran as diplomats from the world's major powers met to respond to Teheran's defiance over its atomic programme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-on-Iran.html
Perhaps because this is a way to prevent a nuclear holocaust, rather than starting one. If you can't tell the difference between the two you need to get your medicine adjusted.

Quote:
Ah!!
I am sure that the people who strongly condemning Ahmadinejad for his harsh words against Israel will immediately ask for the arrest of Mr. Bush and bring him to The Hague for call for genocide, threatened crimes against humanity or however you want to call threatening a nuclear strike against a nation that does not have nukes.
Please cite the laws about genocide and highlight the parts that define such actions as one. If you think it was a crime against humanity instead, use that, etc.

If you can't, please admit to using the strawman. Thanks

McHrozni
McHrozni is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 11:12 AM   #8846
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by Doctor Evil View Post
Correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling that by asking why you really mean whether. In any case I will answer both.

When I said that no one is opposed to peace negotiations I was generalizing. What I meant was to say that all the major parties officially support negotiations whose goal is a two state solution. If you look closely you may find some parties which do not state that, such as 'The Jewish Home' who do not believe in negotiations, but they are in the minority.
I think it is more than being outright against negotiations at all. I don't think Likud or Bibi is interested in the negotiating part of negotiations, and I don't think the statements from Bibi are serious on wanting to have a peace negotiation that both sides would agree to.

There are all kinds of political landmines when it comes to negotiations, and I just don't think that Bibi has the ability or desire to sell a peace negotiation that is not entirely on Likud's terms to his party. Therefore, I do not think his statements on being open to negotiations are genuine.


Originally Posted by Doctor Evil View Post
The reason why somewhat right wing parties are in favor of negotiations, at least in principle, is simple, most of the Israeli public still see a two state solutuon as the most likely solution of the conflict. (That assumes that a solution is possible.) At the same time a lot of people do not think that this is a particularly good time for negotiations, but this is beside the point, and I have no time to expand on it.
A solution is possible, but it would take serious work towards working with the other side, and two of the biggest issues for the right is settlement expansion, and East Jerusalem. Are something that many on the Left, much less the Right cannot bring themselves to negotiate on.


Originally Posted by Doctor Evil View Post
I am part of the left in Israel, and in the upcoming election I will again try to convince my family and friends not to vote for Bibi. Yet I believe that your first paragraph is simply not true. It has been Bibi official policy that he would welcome talks without preconditions. (A reminder, Bibi negotiated with Arafat in his previous stint as PM.) At the same time it was Abbas who required various conditions before talks start. Bibi was even forced to greatly reduce settlement construction for a period and Abbas still refused to negotiate. As a result it was easy for Bibi present himself as moderate, and shift the political discussion in Israel to other topics.

By the way, I think that both Bibi and Abbas are not interested in negotiations at this time because i) it is not clear that Abbas has a claim to represent all Palestinians and ii) no current Israeli leader will match the offer Olmert gave to Abbas four years ago, and Abbas did not accept the offer at the time. This is all maneuvering to make the other side bad, without any substance.
You don't think that Israel has the upper hand in terms of laws and control over the borders (which was the paragraph you disagreed with)?

Of course they have the upper hand, and they are going to have to come to grips with the fact that no matter what would come out of negotiations, there will likely still be attacks coming from Gaza, maybe even worse than they are now if the Palestinians in Gaza get more autonomy and access to weapons under a peace deal.

Right now, many of the laws and control in Israel focus control and protection for Israelis vs. non Israelis. Call that apartheid or whatever you want, but the fact is that it is needed to protect the Israeli population from a majority of non Israeli neighbors that time and time again stated their desire and core goal as the removal (i.e. killing) of all Israeli people in Israel. Israel needs special protections to ensure that the Israeli people are protected from this.

That doesn't however mean that there shouldn't be negotiations with Abbas. Economic development, a reduction of checkpoints, and increased autonomy in the West bank is one of the best ways that Fatah has to convince people to go their route instead of siding with Hamas.
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 11:17 AM   #8847
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by John Mekki View Post
Excellent to condemn Ahmadinejad for what he said about Isreal.
Wondering why the same people do not say a heck about this:

When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "the president of the United States directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way."[161]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_an...ss_destruction

President George W Bush has refused to rule out a nuclear strike on Iran as diplomats from the world's major powers met to respond to Teheran's defiance over its atomic programme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-on-Iran.html

Ah!!
I am sure that the people who strongly condemning Ahmadinejad for his harsh words against Israel will immediately ask for the arrest of Mr. Bush and bring him to The Hague for call for genocide, threatened crimes against humanity or however you want to call threatening a nuclear strike against a nation that does not have nukes.
That is not a valid excuse for ignoring what Ahmadinejad has said.

It does not justify Ahmadinejad's actions, or excuse them.


Ahmadinejad should not be publically supporting genocide. Period. It is not good for him, it is not good for the Iranian people, it is not good for anyone, and no excuse will change that.
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 11:26 AM   #8848
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by John Mekki View Post
Excellent to condemn Ahmadinejad for what he said about Isreal.
Wondering why the same people do not say a heck about this:

When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "the president of the United States directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way."[161]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_an...ss_destruction

President George W Bush has refused to rule out a nuclear strike on Iran as diplomats from the world's major powers met to respond to Teheran's defiance over its atomic programme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-on-Iran.html

Ah!!
I am sure that the people who strongly condemning Ahmadinejad for his harsh words against Israel will immediately ask for the arrest of Mr. Bush and bring him to The Hague for call for genocide, threatened crimes against humanity or however you want to call threatening a nuclear strike against a nation that does not have nukes.
the rebublicon war-mongers will pooh-pooh this post.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 11:42 AM   #8849
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
the rebublicon war-mongers will pooh-pooh this post.
I never said that I did not condemn those kinds of statements from Bush, and I have done so many times in the past.

That however does not provide an excuse for ignoring just as bad or worse statements from Ahmadinejad.

Statements in support of genocide are never good for anyone, and no excuse will change that.
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 11:46 AM   #8850
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by HoverBoarder View Post
That is not a valid excuse for ignoring what Ahmadinejad has said.
Ahmadinejad has said that, " the state of israel will be wiped from the pages of history."
that is hardly equal to a threat of a nuke attack.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 12:05 PM   #8851
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
Ahmadinejad has said that, " the state of israel will be wiped from the pages of history."
that is hardly equal to a threat of a nuke attack.
Why?

One is pro genocide through mass destruction and killing, and the other is pro mass destruction.

Neither are good.

Also, Bush is no longer in power, and never will be again. Ahmadinejad however is.

Ahmadinejad has the ability to carry out his threat, while Bush does not and will never be able to in the future.

One is an active threat to everyone in the world, one was a historical threat.


Why should anything be used as an excuse to ignore the pro genocide and mass destruction comments from Ahmadinejad?
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 12:12 PM   #8852
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by HoverBoarder View Post
Why?

One is pro genocide through mass destruction and killing, and the other is pro mass destruction.

Neither are good.

Also, Bush is no longer in power, and never will be again. Ahmadinejad however is.

Ahmadinejad has the ability to carry out his threat, while Bush does not and will never be able to in the future.

One is an active threat to everyone in the world, one was a historical threat.


Why should anything be used as an excuse to ignore the pro genocide and mass destruction comments from Ahmadinejad?
re-read what he said.
he did not threaten genocide.
he said that history would not remember the 'state' of israel.
this is not a threat to its people, only to their treacherous 'state' with its draconian domestic and foreign policies.

and as far as israel's ability to make war....
iran has no nukes...israel has many.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 12:31 PM   #8853
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
re-read what he said.
he did not threaten genocide.
he said that history would not remember the 'state' of israel.
this is not a threat to its people, only to their treacherous 'state' with its draconian domestic and foreign policies.

and as far as israel's ability to make war....
iran has no nukes...israel has many.
No Israel, means no Israelis in it.

There is no way to achieve the goal that Ahmadinejad has stated many times without carrying out genocide.

Iran’s President Calls Israel ‘an Insult to Humankind’ + more quotes from him here.
Originally Posted by Ahmadinejad on August 7th 2012
"The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor. Even if the Zionists remain on one span (more like inch) of the Land of Palestine is dangerous, because they will come to have a legal and official government."

"A new Middle East will definitely take shape, but with the grace of God and the help of the nations in this new Middle East, there will be no American or Zionist presence in it."
You don't achieve the goal that Ahmadinejad talked about above without killing a lot of people and performing genocide in Israel.



However, that doesn't mean that there is not a way forward, it just means that comments like the ones from Ahmadinejad should be condemned, not excused.

Here's something very positive:

Israel and Iran hold 'positive' nuclear talks in Brussels

Quote:
Israeli and Iranian officials are taking part in a nuclear non-proliferation meeting in Brussels on Monday, in the hope of paving the way for a full international conference in the next few months on banning nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East.

A handful of officials from both Israel and Iran are involved in the two-day event, ostensibly in their capacity as private citizens, in what was billed as an academic seminar.

But the delegations are led by senior officials and have the permission of their respective governments to take part in an informal discussion with representatives from about 10 Arab states, US officials and European moderators to explore the possibility of holding a UN-sponsored conference on establishing a WMD-free zone in the Middle East.

The Israeli team is led by Jeremy Issacharoff, an ambassador for strategic affairs at the foreign ministry; the chief Iranian representative is Ali Asghar Soltanieh, the country's long-serving ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. Also taking part is Jaakko Laajava, the Finnish diplomat tasked by the UN secretary general to organise the planned conference in Helsinki.

In contrast to the ever-worsening sabre-rattling over the Iranian nuclear programme, the mood at the meeting, convened by the EU Non-Proliferation Consortium, was described by one participant as "respectful and positive".
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 12:44 PM   #8854
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by HoverBoarder View Post
No Israel, means no Israelis in it.

There is no way to achieve the goal that Ahmadinejad has stated many times without carrying out genocide.

Iran’s President Calls Israel ‘an Insult to Humankind’ + more quotes from him here.


You don't achieve the goal that Ahmadinejad talked about above without killing a lot of people and performing genocide in Israel.



However, that doesn't mean that there is not a way forward, it just means that comments like the ones from Ahmadinejad should be condemned, not excused.

Here's something very positive:

Israel and Iran hold 'positive' nuclear talks in Brussels
although i agree with, "The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor," it does not mean that i wish all israelis dead.
not all israelis of jews are zionist, and not all zionists are jews.
for example, the harper government in canada is very 'zionist' and blindly supports everything that israel does.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 12:47 PM   #8855
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
although i agree with, "The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor," it does not mean that i wish all israelis dead.
not all israelis of jews are zionist, and not all zionists are jews.
for example, the harper government in canada is very 'zionist' and blindly supports everything that israel does.
You cannot achieve that goal without performing genocide.
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 01:17 PM   #8856
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by HoverBoarder View Post
You cannot achieve that goal without performing genocide.
overthrowing an oppressive government does not equate with genocide.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 01:22 PM   #8857
trustbutverify
Illuminator
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,408
Originally Posted by John Mekki View Post
Excellent to condemn Ahmadinejad for what he said about Isreal.
Wondering why the same people do not say a heck about this:

When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "the president of the United States directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way."[161]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_an...ss_destruction

President George W Bush has refused to rule out a nuclear strike on Iran as diplomats from the world's major powers met to respond to Teheran's defiance over its atomic programme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-on-Iran.html

Ah!!
I am sure that the people who strongly condemning Ahmadinejad for his harsh words against Israel will immediately ask for the arrest of Mr. Bush and bring him to The Hague for call for genocide, threatened crimes against humanity or however you want to call threatening a nuclear strike against a nation that does not have nukes.
Do you actually read your posts before submitting them?
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 01:45 PM   #8858
trustbutverify
Illuminator
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,408
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
although i agree with, "The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor," it does not mean that i wish all israelis dead.
not all israelis of jews are zionist, and not all zionists are jews.
for example, the harper government in canada is very 'zionist' and blindly supports everything that israel does.
Just because someone uses exactly the same vile, racist terminology used to demonize, terrorize and liquidate Jews throughout history doesn't mean that someone is a racist. As long as they replace the word "Jew" with the word "Zionist". That's the key.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 03:14 PM   #8859
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
Just because someone uses exactly the same vile, racist terminology used to demonize, terrorize and liquidate Jews throughout history doesn't mean that someone is a racist. As long as they replace the word "Jew" with the word "Zionist". That's the key.
codswallop.
i despise the domestic and foreign policies if the israeli government.
i have nothing against the jewish people.
i despise our prime minister and his governments blind support of anything that israel does.
however, i have nothing against jewish canadians.
if you cannot see the difference, it is your issue, not mine.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 03:39 PM   #8860
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 16,525
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
although i agree with, "The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor," it does not mean that i wish all israelis dead.
It doesn't mean you don't want them dead either. If you're the head of a nation that's building nuclear weapons, the onus is on you to clarify.

Your personal agreement with that statement doesn't say good things about you, either.

Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
not all israelis of jews are zionist, and not all zionists are jews.
You think this makes it less bigoted?

Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
overthrowing an oppressive government does not equate with genocide.
With nuclear weapons?
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 03:42 PM   #8861
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
With nuclear weapons?
iran has no nukes.
israel has many.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 03:51 PM   #8862
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 16,525
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
codswallop.
i despise the domestic and foreign policies if the israeli government.
i have nothing against the jewish people.
i despise our prime minister and his governments blind support of anything that israel does.
however, i have nothing against jewish canadians.
if you cannot see the difference, it is your issue, not mine.
The difference is that you're willing to excuse or ignore any and all incitement and violent rhetoric from one side while simultaneously dismissing any need or desire for self-preservation from the other side. You can claim religion or ethnicity is not behind the double-standard, but there is still a double-standard.
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 03:55 PM   #8863
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 16,525
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
iran has no nukes...
Not yet, but they're clearly trying to make them.

When they do, do you support their use in removing the "cancerous tumor" you described earlier?
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 04:00 PM   #8864
trustbutverify
Illuminator
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,408
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
codswallop.
i despise the domestic and foreign policies if the israeli government.
i have nothing against the jewish people.
i despise our prime minister and his governments blind support of anything that israel does.
however, i have nothing against jewish canadians.
if you cannot see the difference, it is your issue, not mine.
Of course you and Ahneedajob aren't racists. You just both believe that most Jews are collections of diseased, filth ridden cells growing uncontrollably in an attempt to infect and destroy the healthy host cells.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 04:10 PM   #8865
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
Of course you and Ahneedajob aren't racists. You just both believe that most Jews are collections of diseased, filth ridden cells growing uncontrollably in an attempt to infect and destroy the healthy host cells.
more codswallop, in the form of frothing rhetoric.
the state of israel is not 'most jews'.

i know what is in my heart.
you do not.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 05:23 PM   #8866
trustbutverify
Illuminator
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,408
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
although i agree with, "The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor," it does not mean that i wish all israelis dead.
not all israelis of jews are zionist, and not all zionists are jews.
for example, the harper government in canada is very 'zionist' and blindly supports everything that israel does.
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
more codswallop, in the form of frothing rhetoric.
the state of israel is not 'most jews'.
Let's see here. You stated that "Zionists are a cancerous tumor". I replied that you and your holocaust-doubting friend believed most Jews are a cancerous tumor. About 80% of all Jews live in Israel or the US. Unless you're claiming that most Jews aren't Zionists, my characterization is correct. Is that what you're claiming?


Quote:
i know what is in my heart.
you do not.
Right, because racist people are never able to convince themselves they aren't really racist.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 05:29 PM   #8867
bit_pattern
Illuminator
 
bit_pattern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,384
**** Israel and its conservative American acolytes. [SNIP]

Edited by kmortis:  Removed personal comments.
__________________
"You are the epitome of the 'pigeon playing chess'. No matter how good I am at chess, you are just going to knock the pieces over, **** on the board and strut around like you've won something"

"In this political climate, all of science is vulnerable to ideological attack when reality disagrees with political beliefs."

Last edited by kmortis; 13th November 2012 at 05:49 AM. Reason: Removed to comply with Rule 0
bit_pattern is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 05:58 PM   #8868
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
Let's see here. You stated that "Zionists are a cancerous tumor". I replied that you and your holocaust-doubting friend believed most Jews are a cancerous tumor. About 80% of all Jews live in Israel or the US. Unless you're claiming that most Jews aren't Zionists, my characterization is correct. Is that what you're claiming?




Right, because racist people are never able to convince themselves they aren't really racist.
please quote where i have said anything about jews in america.
and keep your smarmy accusations for one who cares what you think.

i have nothing against jews.
i despise the domestic and foreign policies of the state of israel.
these statements are not remotely in opposition.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 06:15 PM   #8869
trustbutverify
Illuminator
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,408
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
please quote where i have said anything about jews in america.
and keep your smarmy accusations for one who cares what you think.

i have nothing against jews.
i despise the domestic and foreign policies of the state of israel.
these statements are not remotely in opposition.
You stated that "Zionists are cancerous tumors." Zionists live in countries other than Israel. Unless you're claiming that most Jews worldwide aren't Zionists, my statement that you believe most Jews are cancerous tumors is 100% correct. And when someone makes racist comments, I'm going to call them on it. If you don't like it... well, you know what you can do.

Last edited by trustbutverify; 11th November 2012 at 06:16 PM.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 06:40 PM   #8870
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
well, you know what you can do.
yup...ignore...bye.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 06:43 PM   #8871
trustbutverify
Illuminator
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,408
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
yup...ignore...bye.
How will I go on?
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 06:47 PM   #8872
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
actually, it appears that about 73% of jews are zionists...higher than i would have thought...
so 73% of the jewish world view themselves as superior to their fellow humans and believe this gives them the right to administer an apartheid state in the middle east.
wow.
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/ab...fm?ItemNo=1173
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 09:00 PM   #8873
Virus
NWO Inquisitor
 
Virus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,875
That website says Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves.

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/an...Liebermann.cfm
__________________
"They say the right things. They ‘speak truth to power’, ‘transgress boundaries’, and all the rest of it. But you will have noticed that they are careful only to challenge religions that won’t hurt them (Christianity) and governments that won’t arrest them (democracies)." - Nick Cohen.
Virus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 09:11 PM   #8874
bit_pattern
Illuminator
 
bit_pattern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,384
Originally Posted by Virus View Post
That website says Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves.

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/an...Liebermann.cfm
Haven't looked at the link yet but am willing to bet it doesn't say anything of the sort...
__________________
"You are the epitome of the 'pigeon playing chess'. No matter how good I am at chess, you are just going to knock the pieces over, **** on the board and strut around like you've won something"

"In this political climate, all of science is vulnerable to ideological attack when reality disagrees with political beliefs."
bit_pattern is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 09:18 PM   #8875
bikerdruid
hermit hippy weirdo
 
bikerdruid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: green island autonomous zone
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by bit_pattern View Post
Haven't looked at the link yet but am willing to bet it doesn't say anything of the sort...
and you would be correct.
it does not.
__________________
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!!
bikerdruid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 09:59 PM   #8876
L.Y.S.
Illuminator
 
L.Y.S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,477
Originally Posted by Virus View Post
That website says Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves.

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/an...Liebermann.cfm
The linked document doesn't inherently say this. Judaism and Zionism are by no means mutually exclusive ideas. And the document goes into great detail to explain this concept. I will however tip my hat in saying that the document did infer that Zionists are to blame for the travesties of the holocaust, though it was a fairly cherry picked point on your part. Furthermore, it is important to note that the document also establishes the general disdain SEVERAL leading figures of Judaism had for Zionism. These figures (according to the document) have warned that Zionism can become JUST as violent and racist as other nationalists movements (including Nazism, which several parallels are made but the direct comparison is not stated. at least from my reading of the document). The document also states how several pro-Zionists politicians are disconnected from Jewish law, and are thus unqualified to speak for the Jewish people during the tumultuous times of the 1930s and 40s (again, what the document states, not independently verified).

Again, this document does not inherently blame Jews for the holocaust, but it does go into excruciating detail as to how Zionism could've potentially sparked the holocaust. I of course take no position on this, other than to say that the above is what the document said, and your statement is not entirely true, as always. Please attempt not to cherry pick, thank you.


Last edited by L.Y.S.; 11th November 2012 at 10:07 PM.
L.Y.S. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 10:40 PM   #8877
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by bikerdruid View Post
overthrowing an oppressive government does not equate with genocide.
It's not just the government that groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, or the Iranian theocracy want to overthrow.

It is the very existence of Jews in what is now Israel and Palestine.

It would take genocide to achieve that goal.


That is a trap of hate, and an easy way out to avoid the hard work of achieving peace. You are not going to remove Israel from the Middle East without engaging in major genocidal killing.


You think the current treatment of the Palestinians is unfair, I think that the current treatment of the Palestinians is unfair.

You think the current living conditions forced on the Palestinians in Gaza, in the West Bank, and in camps all across the Middle East are unjust. I think the current living conditions forced on the Palestinians in Gaza, in the West Bank, and in camps all across the Middle East are unjust.

You think the killing of Palestinians in Gaza right now, and the people killed including the families and children killed in attacks like operation Cast lead are horrific and evil. I also think that they are wrong, unjust, and were often unnecessary and preventable.

You and I have both looked at the continual shrinking control of Palestinian land, and thought that it was not right. That is was unjust. That it is wrong.

The only real difference is what you and I think should be done about it.


For too long, too many in the Middle East have grown up in cultures of hate, despair, and desires for revenge. It is the easy way out to blame this all on Israel, to blame it all on the Zionists. To caste our finger out in an unflinching and unwavering certainty of guilt at the party that is fully responsible for all of the woes.

That thinking however prevents serious self reflection. It is a 'scapegoating understanding' that forgoes serious analysis of all of the many factors in this conflict in favor of a simplified one sided, and unchanging viewpoint.

It is the easy way out, and it doesn't help anyone.

It doesn't help the poor kids in unrecognized villages get any closer to getting the food and materials they need to survive. It doesn't help the families in Gaza living near the Israeli border reduce their fear that at any time they could be a victim of an Israeli air or artillery strike. It doesn't help the families living in the many Palestinian camps around the Middle East get any closer to the goal that they will at some point be vindicated for their suffering and earn the right to return to their families homes.

It is easy to slip into a pattern of hate and one sided condemnation, but it doesn't get the Palestinians anywhere closer to peace, and it is not befitting of the beyond war hippie ideology that you and I respect.

If you truly care about the people suffering in Palestine, there is a way to help them, but it cannot be achieved through war. It cannot be achieved through genocide, it can only be achieved through lasting peace, and the promotion of mutual understanding and justice.


Letters from Asel
Originally Posted by Asel Asleh

Today I will be asked to choose between what they call as “protecting and remembering” and between what they call “forgiving.” I will be asked to choose. And I will, will my choice be the right thing to do, or will it be the wrong thing to do. Well… as a friend of mine once said: “Out beyond ideas of right-doing and wrong-doing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there.”
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 11:32 PM   #8878
trustbutverify
Illuminator
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,408
Originally Posted by Virus View Post
That website says Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves.

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/an...Liebermann.cfm

Quote:
IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT ALL THE SAGES AND SAINTS IN EUROPE AT THE TIME OF HITLER'S RISE DECLARED THAT HE WAS A MESSENGER OF DIVINE WRATH, SENT TO CHASTEN THE JEWS BECAUSE OF THE BITTER APOSTASY OF ZIONISM AGAINST THE BELIEF IN THE EVENTUAL MESSIANIC REDEMPTION.
The so called "anti-Zionist movement" is, for the most part, nothing more than a clumsy front for a cadre of vile bigots. Their ranks are utterly saturated with racism, and as the above clearly demonstrates- there is no level low enough to which they won't stoop.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th November 2012, 11:41 PM   #8879
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,138
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
The so called "anti-Zionist movement" is, for the most part, nothing more than a clumsy front for a cadre of vile bigots. Their ranks are utterly saturated with racism, and as the above clearly demonstrates- there is no level low enough to which they won't stoop.
Most 'anti-Zionist' groups do not try very hard to hide their racism.

It's a balancing act. They want to be just racist enough that they can attract other like minded members, but still maintain their thinly veiled covers so they don't have to go through the inconvenient aspect of having to directly call themselves racists.


We went through the same thing with the 'Birther' movement here.
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th November 2012, 06:04 AM   #8880
John Mekki
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 537
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Perhaps because this is a way to prevent a nuclear holocaust, rather than starting one. If you can't tell the difference between the two you need to get your medicine adjusted.
So you would "prevent" a "nuclear Holocaust" by dropping a nuclear bomb on a country that, so far, has not been proven to have nukes?
Gee..

This reminds me of Adolf Hitler that said that Nazi Germany had to invade USSR (and kill 20 millions people in the process) to prevent an invasion by the USSR.
Good grief..

The only good thing I can say is that, fortunately enough, you are not in place to do much harm (hopefully). Phew!!
John Mekki is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

JREF Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:25 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.