Israeli

[Grumfutock]

TheRealFingers99 said:

Grumfutock said:

Whilst dead is dead I would suggest that neither Irgun of Lehi held people for 2 years then brutally beheaded them. Their crimes are also almost 70 years ago.

The Irgun were so incompetent that they had to send in a clean up squad to finish off the survivors. Some witnesses have reported that cutting weapons (machetes or swords) were seen. Great humanitarian work by the founders of modern Israel.

If the time is so great, if the issue so unimportant, release the documents. Or should we expect that they are to be destroyed in an unfortunate Hamas missile strike?

Further, the Porajmos and the Holocaust date back even further. There are still people waiting for reparations, the return of their property, a simple acknowledgement that something actually happened to their family. Should we tell them to forget it, it was so long ago, it's not important today, move along, you're holding up the bus?

Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Thursday 21st August 16:34

Most certainly not but should it be part of the debate concerning the current war? No. If and when Israel attack Germany and use the holocaust as their reason then lets talk about it.

[Grumfutock]

Alpinestars said:

TheRealFingers99 said:

Grumfutock said:

I also note the lack of posts condemning ISIS on the James Foley threads.

ISIS are evil. James Foley's killing was an atrocious act.

But both bear comparison with the actions of Irgun and the Stern gang.

But both have diddly squat to do with this thread?

Correct but they do help to explain certain peoples back grounds and the reasons behind their Jewish hatred, no matter how hard they try and hide it.

[Scuffers]

Countdown said:

audidoody said:

3. By your definition Royal Air Force Bomber Command were an extreme terrorist organisation between 1940 and 1945 and the British Army is also a terrorist organisation following the events in 1972 of what came to be known as "Bloody Sunday".

Of course they aren't - and the IDF isn't,

The British didn't set up permanent Settlements in Germany or suggest that, being of Anglo-Saxon ancestry, they were entitled to migrate en masse to Germany and evict the indigenous population.

err... Yes we did, in fact, we are only just close to pulling out from the last of them (2019 is the end date apparently)

[Grumfutock]

zuby84 said:

Alpinestars said:

TheRealFingers99 said:

Grumfutock said:

I also note the lack of posts condemning ISIS on the James Foley threads.

ISIS are evil. James Foley's killing was an atrocious act.

But both bear comparison with the actions of Irgun and the Stern gang.

But both have diddly squat to do with this thread?

Just leave them to it, they're getting desperate and just start deflecting as most people do when they get their back up against the wall in terms of arguments/debates.

We all agree that ISIS is a evil terrorist organisation; I don't think you have to fight/argue to get that point across with sane individuals - quite why some posters feel that you have to condemn ISIS publicly before you can condemn the IDF is beyond me. But hey-ho leave them to it.

As usual you really have missed the point! Why am I not surprised.

[Alpinestars]

Grumfutock said:

Correct but they do help to explain certain peoples back grounds and the reasons behind their Jewish hatred, no matter how hard they try and hide it.

I think you need to drop the Jewish hatred victim card. Israel is a pariah, that does not mean I have anything against Jews - which I categorically don't.

[TheRealFingers99]

Grumfutock said:

Most certainly not but should it be part of the debate concerning the current war? No.

Of course it should. Unless Israel comes to terms with all of its past (just as the South Africans were compelled to) the war will continue: there can be no viable peace without truth and reconciliation.

[zuby84]

Grumfutock said:

As usual you really have missed the point! Why am I not surprised.

Ok then, please educate what "point" is it that I have missed. I can assure you; I know what premise you are trying to make; but it is a poorly thought out premise on your end IMO.

Correct me if you think I am putting words in your mouth; but your premise was that if someone was not condemning ISIS (in a similar PH thread) that the fact that they are condemning Israel in this thread makes their argument less valid? Of course there are people out there who would be more vocal in their opposition against Muslims/Jews/Buddhists (due to "religionism"/racism) but to accuse a poster of doing this with no evidence is disingenuous at best.

If the above is correct; then I was merely pointing out that one does not need to publicly condemn something for one to be able to condemn something else (no matter how similar you feel the two might be.)

So tell me; you are condemning Hamas (quite rightly so); have you publicly condemned extremist Buddha violence in your life? Thought not. You see; your premise does not hold up.

I think it is you that is missing the point, but feel free to post a reply with no further detail in it whatsoever due to your lazy debating style.

[Grumfutock]

TheRealFingers99 said:

Grumfutock said:

Most certainly not but should it be part of the debate concerning the current war? No.

Of course it should. Unless Israel comes to terms with all of its past (just as the South Africans were compelled to) the war will continue: there can be no viable peace without truth and reconciliation.

Oh I see. So Israel, as part of any peace package, must confess all of it's sins. I also presume you will be expecting them to surrender people to war crimes trials?

The slight flaw in your plan is that the other side will need to be subject to the same rule. I really cant see them doing it can you? End result, no peace. All Israel's fault. Yes of course.

[Grumfutock]

Alpinestars said:

Grumfutock said:

Correct but they do help to explain certain peoples back grounds and the reasons behind their Jewish hatred, no matter how hard they try and hide it.

I think you need to drop the Jewish hatred victim card. Israel is a pariah, that does not mean I have anything against Jews - which I categorically don't.

I never mentioned victim cards. What I said was some peoples ethnic background goes a long way to explain their Jewish hatred.

And I never said you did I?

[S 8 GRN]

Interesting interview. The truth is most definitely out there.

Wiki "Mosab Hassan Yousef (Arabic: مصعب حسن يوسف‎) (born 1978)[3] is a Palestinian and son of a Hamas founder and leader Sheikh Hassan Yousef.[1] From 1997 to 2007, he worked undercover for Israel's internal security service Shin Bet, which considered him its most valuable source within the Hamas leadership.[1]

According to Israeli sources, the information Yousef supplied prevented dozens of suicide attacks and assassinations of Israelis, exposed numerous Hamas cells,[1] and assisted Israel in hunting down many militants, including his own father.[4] In March 2010, he published his autobiography titled Son of Hamas.[5]"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KakxXN5Z-XI#t=16

[Grumfutock]

zuby84 said:

Grumfutock said:

As usual you really have missed the point! Why am I not surprised.

Ok then, please educate what "point" is it that I have missed. I can assure you; I know what premise you are trying to make; but it is a poorly thought out premise on your end IMO.

Correct me if you think I am putting words in your mouth; but your premise was that if someone was not condemning ISIS (in a similar PH thread) that the fact that they are condemning Israel in this thread makes their argument less valid? Of course there are people out there who would be more vocal in their opposition against Muslims/Jews/Buddhists (due to "religionism"/racism) but to accuse a poster of doing this with no evidence is disingenuous at best.

If the above is correct; then I was merely pointing out that one does not need to publicly condemn something for one to be able to condemn something else (no matter how similar you feel the two might be.)

So tell me; you are condemning Hamas (quite rightly so); have you publicly condemned extremist Buddha violence in your life? Thought not. You see; your premise does not hold up.

I think it is you that is missing the point, but feel free to post a reply with no further detail in it whatsoever due to your lazy debating style.

Yep as I said you have completely missed the point! Try reading back.

[Mojocvh]

Scuffers said:

Countdown said:

audidoody said:

3. By your definition Royal Air Force Bomber Command were an extreme terrorist organisation between 1940 and 1945 and the British Army is also a terrorist organisation following the events in 1972 of what came to be known as "Bloody Sunday".

Of course they aren't - and the IDF isn't,

The British didn't set up permanent Settlements in Germany or suggest that, being of Anglo-Saxon ancestry, they were entitled to migrate en masse to Germany and evict the indigenous population.

err... Yes we did, in fact, we are only just close to pulling out from the last of them (2019 is the end date apparently)

Usual idiotic statement.

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Grumfutock said:

Oh ok in that case what about Kfar Etzion?

And what relevance does either have with now? Should we start a UN investigation into our behaviour towards the Boers? Should the USA be in the ICC for their treatment of Native Indians? Get real mate and let us at least debate the here and now!

The here and now are because of those events. If both sides honestly accepted the historic events, that would be the first step to reconciliation.

A truth and reconciliation commission would be a good starting point, but that will not happen until both sides come honestly to the peace table, rather than just as a propaganda opportunity.

[Countdown]

Scuffers said:

Countdown said:

audidoody said:

3. By your definition Royal Air Force Bomber Command were an extreme terrorist organisation between 1940 and 1945 and the British Army is also a terrorist organisation following the events in 1972 of what came to be known as "Bloody Sunday".

Of course they aren't - and the IDF isn't,

The British didn't set up permanent Settlements in Germany or suggest that, being of Anglo-Saxon ancestry, they were entitled to migrate en masse to Germany and evict the indigenous population.

err... Yes we did, in fact, we are only just close to pulling out from the last of them (2019 is the end date apparently)

No we didn't and you know it. You may be deliberately confusing the BAOR with an army of occupation. That role stopped years ago. FWIW there are many reasons why an army may be based in another country for legal, peaceful reasons. None of these apply to the IDF.

Of course, were the IDF intending to withdraw at some point, letting the Palestinians govern themselves, and removing the Settlements then none of this would be an issue. This is the part where you, Grumfutock, et al look embarrassed and try to come up with reasons to show that the IDF isn't really an army of occupation and that the Israeli Govt is genuinely committed to peace.

[TheRealFingers99]

Grumfutock said:

Oh I see. So Israel, as part of any peace package, must confess all of it's sins. I also presume you will be expecting them to surrender people to war crimes trials?

The slight flaw in your plan is that the other side will need to be subject to the same rule. I really cant see them doing it can you? End result, no peace. All Israel's fault. Yes of course.

Did I say exactly that? I don't think so.

The exact circumstances (etc.) would have to be part of the peace package (as in SA) determined by the parties involved. If they want to rule out war crimes trials, or even punishment for those who admit their guilt, that should be for both parties to agree on.

It can be done and has been done. Then we can draw a line under it and simply remember the dead.

Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Thursday 21st August 18:27

[zuby84]

Grumfutock said:

zuby84 said:

Grumfutock said:

As usual you really have missed the point! Why am I not surprised.

Ok then, please educate what "point" is it that I have missed. I can assure you; I know what premise you are trying to make; but it is a poorly thought out premise on your end IMO.

Correct me if you think I am putting words in your mouth; but your premise was that if someone was not condemning ISIS (in a similar PH thread) that the fact that they are condemning Israel in this thread makes their argument less valid? Of course there are people out there who would be more vocal in their opposition against Muslims/Jews/Buddhists (due to "religionism"/racism) but to accuse a poster of doing this with no evidence is disingenuous at best.

If the above is correct; then I was merely pointing out that one does not need to publicly condemn something for one to be able to condemn something else (no matter how similar you feel the two might be.)

So tell me; you are condemning Hamas (quite rightly so); have you publicly condemned extremist Buddha violence in your life? Thought not. You see; your premise does not hold up.

I think it is you that is missing the point, but feel free to post a reply with no further detail in it whatsoever due to your lazy debating style.

Yep as I said you have completely missed the point! Try reading back.

You just can't make this up

Edited by zuby84 on Thursday 21st August 19:04

[anonymous-user]

Mojocvh said:

Usual idiotic statement.

Quite!
I know that he likes to draw parallels but that one is especially silly.

[Grumfutock]

zuby84 said:

Grumfutock said:

zuby84 said:

Grumfutock said:

As usual you really have missed the point! Why am I not surprised.

Ok then, please educate what "point" is it that I have missed. I can assure you; I know what premise you are trying to make; but it is a poorly thought out premise on your end IMO.

Correct me if you think I am putting words in your mouth; but your premise was that if someone was not condemning ISIS (in a similar PH thread) that the fact that they are condemning Israel in this thread makes their argument less valid? Of course there are people out there who would be more vocal in their opposition against Muslims/Jews/Buddhists (due to "religionism"/racism) but to accuse a poster of doing this with no evidence is disingenuous at best.

If the above is correct; then I was merely pointing out that one does not need to publicly condemn something for one to be able to condemn something else (no matter how similar you feel the two might be.)

So tell me; you are condemning Hamas (quite rightly so); have you publicly condemned extremist Buddha violence in your life? Thought not. You see; your premise does not hold up.

I think it is you that is missing the point, but feel free to post a reply with no further detail in it whatsoever due to your lazy debating style.

Yep as I said you have completely missed the point! Try reading back.

You just can't make this up

Edited by zuby84 on Thursday 21st August 19:04

If you cant be bothered or are to stupid to read all of the post's and get the message then I feel absolutely no inclination in educating you. Your ignorance knows no bounds, your ineptitude is gargantuan and your arrogance has no limits.

May I suggest, yet again, that YOU read back and try your hardest to think about what has been written. It is all there waiting for you. Now this may take time and it may hurt you brain but if you really try you will get there in the end. If all else fails try drawing it with your crayons.

By all means feel free to come back with more of your usual inane drivel, childish insults and pathetic rhetoric. I wont wait up.

Edited by Grumfutock on Thursday 21st August 19:43

[zuby84]

Grumfutock said:

If you cant be bothered or are to stupid to read all of the post's and get the message then I feel absolutely no inclination in educating you. Your ignorance knows no bounds, your ineptitude is gargantuan and your arrogance has no limits.

May I suggest, yet again, that YOU read back and try your hardest to think about what has been written. It is all there waiting for you. Now this may take time and it may hurt you brain but if you really try you will get there in the end. If all else fails try drawing it with your crayons.

By all means feel free to come back with more of your usual inane drivel, childish insults and pathetic rhetoric. I wont wait up.

Like I said Grumfutock; let me know what you meant by when you said:

Grumfutock said:

I also note the lack of posts condemning ISIS on the James Foley threads.

Allahu Akbar

I'm stupid; I admit it. What was your premise when you said that? And remember I'm stupid so don't keep on asking me to go back and figure out what you were really saying; surely it would just be less time-consuming for both of us if you just type a few sentences so I can tell what you really meant? I've asked this a few times; but all I keep on getting is "go back and read it."

[Grumfutock]

zuby84 said:

I'm stupid; I admit it. What was your premise when you said that? And remember I'm stupid so don't keep on asking me to go back and figure out what you were really saying; surely it would just be less time-consuming for both of us if you just type a few sentences so I can tell what you really meant? I've asked this a few times; but all I keep on getting is "go back and read it."

And as I have repeatedly said READ BACK!!! This really isn't that hard!

Just to assist you. My post was a reply to audio, who in turn was replying to league. All on page 276 if you look. Now if you have bothered to do that kindly tell me where did it involve, mention or allude to you? Are you becoming that obsessed with trolling me that you just assume anything I type is about you?

Feel free to apologise anytime!

I look forward to your next insightful utterance.