Discussion
Mrr T said:
s1962a said:
Any ban on free speech should be condemned. Perhaps you can also post the link to Hamas promoting free speech,
Would you extend the same courtesy in describing Israel and its actions? (I know you have just condemned the ban on free speech)
Mr Snap said:
s1962a said:
Guam said:
s1962a said:
This is wrong. Attacking a place of worship or innocent people is a deplorable act.
More reports are appearing, things in France and Germany appear to be getting pretty serious.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2703594/Ha...
DM article said:
An anti-Israel demonstration at the French capital’s Bastille Square turned violent after protesters attacked a synagogue, trapping scores of people inside as police fought to protect them.
In response, 150 Jewish men were seen marching through Paris armed with iron bars seeking to confront pro-Palestinian groups. Then, a mob of Muslim youths reportedly shouting ‘Death to Jews’ and ‘Slit Jews’ throats’ ransacked and burned down a chemist owned by a Jewish family, as well as a kosher supermarket.
In response, 150 Jewish men were seen marching through Paris armed with iron bars seeking to confront pro-Palestinian groups. Then, a mob of Muslim youths reportedly shouting ‘Death to Jews’ and ‘Slit Jews’ throats’ ransacked and burned down a chemist owned by a Jewish family, as well as a kosher supermarket.
Mr Snap said:
A few pages back you said "Lets do the numbers. The current ground incursion has been going on 16 days. The previous shelling was about 10 days. So in 26 days the Israel's have killed about 700 civilians. Based on Wiki population figures (1.8M) and birth rates (2.4%) in Gaza in the last 26 days 3,000 babies will have been born."
You're quite literally saying that it doesn't matter that the Israelis have killed 700 innocent civilians because there have probably been 3,000 babies born to replace them. If you are unable to see that this is a vile juxtaposition, suggesting that Gazan deaths don't count because of their birth rate - an implication that most people would interpret as out and out racism - you're a greater fool than I thought.
I responded by asking...
Is it ok to kill people because they breed quickly?
Is it racist to hold this opinion?
The second question is linked to the first. You can tell this because of the way it's phrased; In precisely the same way I linked the last two sentences. Not only was the question obvious, I actually gave you a get out. You could have said "No, I didn't mean it that way." But no, you ploughed on accusing me of racism saying:
"You asked a series of questions none of which had anything to do with racism.
So what ever answers some one might give would not define if they you where or where not racist."
Even if I ignore the fact that your words are grammatically meaningless, your statement proves you simply couldn't understand what had passed before; or that you were again trying to divert attention from another of your ridiculous - and this time possibly racist - statements.
Attempting to accuse me of racism in return is a bit rich. My family are Jews. Both Adolph Hitler and The State of Israel would classify me as a Jew. I even have the "right of return" myself. Think about that. Although born in the UK and none of my family have any affiliations with Israel whatsoever, I only have to turn up at Tel-Aviv to get more rights in Israel than some poor bloody Palestinian whose family have lived in Jerusalem for over 500 years and who was thrown out of his home in last week.
Mr Snap I apologise unreservedly. Rereading my replies to your questions it is easy to misread my reply to the last question.You're quite literally saying that it doesn't matter that the Israelis have killed 700 innocent civilians because there have probably been 3,000 babies born to replace them. If you are unable to see that this is a vile juxtaposition, suggesting that Gazan deaths don't count because of their birth rate - an implication that most people would interpret as out and out racism - you're a greater fool than I thought.
I responded by asking...
Is it ok to kill people because they breed quickly?
Is it racist to hold this opinion?
The second question is linked to the first. You can tell this because of the way it's phrased; In precisely the same way I linked the last two sentences. Not only was the question obvious, I actually gave you a get out. You could have said "No, I didn't mean it that way." But no, you ploughed on accusing me of racism saying:
"You asked a series of questions none of which had anything to do with racism.
So what ever answers some one might give would not define if they you where or where not racist."
Even if I ignore the fact that your words are grammatically meaningless, your statement proves you simply couldn't understand what had passed before; or that you were again trying to divert attention from another of your ridiculous - and this time possibly racist - statements.
Attempting to accuse me of racism in return is a bit rich. My family are Jews. Both Adolph Hitler and The State of Israel would classify me as a Jew. I even have the "right of return" myself. Think about that. Although born in the UK and none of my family have any affiliations with Israel whatsoever, I only have to turn up at Tel-Aviv to get more rights in Israel than some poor bloody Palestinian whose family have lived in Jerusalem for over 500 years and who was thrown out of his home in last week.
I can confirm at no time have I ever intended to imply you are racist.
My reply to the last question would better have been:
"Since none of your previous questions relate to racism any answers would not prove if the person answering is or is not racist"
allnighter said:
Mrr T said:
s1962a said:
Any ban on free speech should be condemned. Perhaps you can also post the link to Hamas promoting free speech,
Would you extend the same courtesy in describing Israel and its actions? (I know you have just condemned the ban on free speech)
Perhaps you could comment on why free speech has been banned in this instance.
Mrr T said:
Mr Snap I apologise unreservedly. Rereading my replies to your questions it is easy to misread my reply to the last question.
I can confirm at no time have I ever intended to imply you are racist.
My reply to the last question would better have been:
"Since none of your previous questions relate to racism any answers would not prove if the person answering is or is not racist"
Apology accepted.I can confirm at no time have I ever intended to imply you are racist.
My reply to the last question would better have been:
"Since none of your previous questions relate to racism any answers would not prove if the person answering is or is not racist"
allnighter said:
o both are as bad as each other? I do not recall anyone on here suggesting Hamas is the shining beacon of democracy in the region. In fact most of us who are concerned about Palestinians stuck between the hammer and the hard place described Hamas as a dictatorship.
Would you extend the same courtesy in describing Israel and its actions? (I know you have just condemned the ban on free speech)
I am glad we agree Hamas is a dictatorship.Would you extend the same courtesy in describing Israel and its actions? (I know you have just condemned the ban on free speech)
A dictatorship which I believe is brutish with little regard to the welfare of its own citizens.
I have said in previous posts:
The Israeli system of PR is a terrible system which gives far to much power to small and extremist parties.
Israel should have made more progress in the West Bank to show it was committed to a longer term solution.
Israel should stop the new settlements.
Israel should not be restricting free speech.
However, saying Hamas and the Israeli are the same is ludicrous.
allnighter said:
am familiar with France(and French speaking too) and I can only say that the 'anti-maghrebins' sentiment against North Africans is worst than anti-Semitism.
True. Having lived in France and being a french speaker, I tend to think a trip to France is a bit like returning to the UK in the 1970's...Mrr T said:
I am glad we agree Hamas is a dictatorship.
A dictatorship which I believe is brutish with little regard to the welfare of its own citizens.
I have said in previous posts:
The Israeli system of PR is a terrible system which gives far to much power to small and extremist parties.
Israel should have made more progress in the West Bank to show it was committed to a longer term solution.
Israel should stop the new settlements.
Israel should not be restricting free speech.
However, saying Hamas and the Israeli are the same is ludicrous.
Nobody is saying they're the same. A dictatorship which I believe is brutish with little regard to the welfare of its own citizens.
I have said in previous posts:
The Israeli system of PR is a terrible system which gives far to much power to small and extremist parties.
Israel should have made more progress in the West Bank to show it was committed to a longer term solution.
Israel should stop the new settlements.
Israel should not be restricting free speech.
However, saying Hamas and the Israeli are the same is ludicrous.
allnighter said:
JagLover said:
allnighter] said:
No other country is associated with the terminology "Right to Exist" it's exclusive to Israel and it's a carte blanche to do what it wants. It's akin to the South African murdering diplomat's 'Diplomatic immunity!' in Lethal Weapons II, and this terminology needs to be 'revoked'.
It is very probably that the only future for any non-muslim minority in any country in the Middle-east is going to be the grave."Right to Exist" is therefore right to life, or at least to stay in the region where they grew up, and for a significant proportion, where their forbearers have always been.
Watching the numerous anti-Semitic incidents over the last few days you also have to question whether Jews have much of a future in Europe either. The rising Muslim population of Europe will replace the role previously performed by skin-headed Neo-Nazis.
s1962a said:
Mrr T - I am concerned that Israel (which is a democracy) is being compared to Hamas, which has shown to be anything but. Do you recall the Adult vs child analogy used a few days ago?
Perhaps you could comment on why free speech has been banned in this instance.
s1962a I am glad we agree Israel is close to being a democracy. Even if its electoral system is terrible.Perhaps you could comment on why free speech has been banned in this instance.
As to why they have imposed this restriction on free speech I have no idea. If you know tell me.
What ever it is restricting free speech should always be condemned.
Mr Snap said:
Attempting to accuse me of racism in return is a bit rich. My family are Jews. Both Adolph Hitler and The State of Israel would classify me as a Jew. I even have the "right of return" myself. Think about that. Although born in the UK and none of my family have any affiliations with Israel whatsoever, I only have to turn up at Tel-Aviv to get more rights in Israel than some poor bloody Palestinian whose family have lived in Jerusalem for over 500 years and who was thrown out of his home in last week.
That is the very truth . . . . . . . 
Edited by SR7492 on Thursday 24th July 13:37
hamas spokesman asks why the arabs arent helping them ,mentions what hamas is about (jihad) and lets slip about palestinian origins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBSWN4s9JU&fe...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBSWN4s9JU&fe...
Mrr T said:
s1962a said:
Mrr T - I am concerned that Israel (which is a democracy) is being compared to Hamas, which has shown to be anything but. Do you recall the Adult vs child analogy used a few days ago?
Perhaps you could comment on why free speech has been banned in this instance.
s1962a I am glad we agree Israel is close to being a democracy. Even if its electoral system is terrible.Perhaps you could comment on why free speech has been banned in this instance.
As to why they have imposed this restriction on free speech I have no idea. If you know tell me.
What ever it is restricting free speech should always be condemned.
One of your posts earlier where you compared the death of children to the birthrate I thought was quite ill advised, and not like your usual posting, which I do hope you read through to vet before hitting submit.
I read some reports that some government officials in Israel wanted to ban Al Jazaeera due to it's 'biased reporting' and now this advert naming some of the children killed is also being banned. Not really bastians for free speech in a major democracy is it?
franki68 said:
hamas spokesman asks why the arabs arent helping them ,mentions what hamas is about (jihad) and lets slip about palestinian origins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBSWN4s9JU&fe...
Rabbi suggests that all Gazans could be wiped out - do you agree with this too? Surely he speaks for everyone and his opinion is fact, not just an opinion.. right?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBSWN4s9JU&fe...
JagLover said:
allnighter said:
JagLover said:
allnighter] said:
No other country is associated with the terminology "Right to Exist" it's exclusive to Israel and it's a carte blanche to do what it wants. It's akin to the South African murdering diplomat's 'Diplomatic immunity!' in Lethal Weapons II, and this terminology needs to be 'revoked'.
It is very probably that the only future for any non-muslim minority in any country in the Middle-east is going to be the grave."Right to Exist" is therefore right to life, or at least to stay in the region where they grew up, and for a significant proportion, where their forbearers have always been.
Watching the numerous anti-Semitic incidents over the last few days you also have to question whether Jews have much of a future in Europe either. The rising Muslim population of Europe will replace the role previously performed by skin-headed Neo-Nazis.
s1962a said:
Thank you for being impartial in your response. Just to make my position clear, I am no advocate of Hamas, and I have no ill thoughts against Israel, apart from it's behaviour during this conflict, which in my mind is disproportionate - especially with the sheer number of children being killed.
One of your posts earlier where you compared the death of children to the birthrate I thought was quite ill advised, and not like your usual posting, which I do hope you read through to vet before hitting submit.
I read some reports that some government officials in Israel wanted to ban Al Jazaeera due to it's 'biased reporting' and now this advert naming some of the children killed is also being banned. Not really bastians for free speech in a major democracy is it?
completely agree ,but where is true democracy ? the bbc are spending hundreds of thousands of pounds attempting to keep the balen report being published (an internal report commissioned in the late 2000s regarding bbc pro -palestinian bias,apparently it is so embarrassing for them.One of your posts earlier where you compared the death of children to the birthrate I thought was quite ill advised, and not like your usual posting, which I do hope you read through to vet before hitting submit.
I read some reports that some government officials in Israel wanted to ban Al Jazaeera due to it's 'biased reporting' and now this advert naming some of the children killed is also being banned. Not really bastians for free speech in a major democracy is it?
franki68 said:
s1962a said:
Thank you for being impartial in your response. Just to make my position clear, I am no advocate of Hamas, and I have no ill thoughts against Israel, apart from it's behaviour during this conflict, which in my mind is disproportionate - especially with the sheer number of children being killed.
One of your posts earlier where you compared the death of children to the birthrate I thought was quite ill advised, and not like your usual posting, which I do hope you read through to vet before hitting submit.
I read some reports that some government officials in Israel wanted to ban Al Jazaeera due to it's 'biased reporting' and now this advert naming some of the children killed is also being banned. Not really bastians for free speech in a major democracy is it?
completely agree ,but where is true democracy ? the bbc are spending hundreds of thousands of pounds attempting to keep the balen report being published (an internal report commissioned in the late 2000s regarding bbc pro -palestinian bias,apparently it is so embarrassing for them.One of your posts earlier where you compared the death of children to the birthrate I thought was quite ill advised, and not like your usual posting, which I do hope you read through to vet before hitting submit.
I read some reports that some government officials in Israel wanted to ban Al Jazaeera due to it's 'biased reporting' and now this advert naming some of the children killed is also being banned. Not really bastians for free speech in a major democracy is it?
The above example is government intervention in a supposed free media.
allnighter said:
Israel, a sovereign country, a nuclear power, with a powerful military, just like any other sovereign country in the West does not need to invoke the "Right To Exist" terminology. She exists, and she will continue to 'exist' no matter what.
Time will tell. South Africa still exists but it's changed a lot, so whether it's still the same thing is highly debateable.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff