Israeli

[zuby84]

Grumfutock said:

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.

Grumfutock, I'm sorry but if you write something (doesn't matter if it's a reply to a reply to a reply) you should know (and be prepared) to clarify what you mean by that; particularly with your rather ambiguous statements that you have a tendency to make. Put your hands up if you can't do that, but don't try and deflect things and get angry because you don't even know what you are arguing for.

I think you are getting rather mixed up to be honest; I have never said/alluded to the fact that anything you type is about me.

I will try and make this simple for you. Let bygones-be-bygones with regards to our discussion over the last few hours and I'll ask a more straight-forward question that might just give me an idea of what you were trying to say.

=================================================

Do you believe that in order to have any legibility for someone to condemn IDF publicly that they must also in turn condemn ISIS publicly?

Yes or No.

=================================================

Please don't ask me to go back and read your thoughts when you wrote your post, just humour me for a bit and answer yes or no.

(Edited to separate the question from the rest of the post)

Edited by zuby84 on Thursday 21st August 20:35

[Grumfutock]

zuby84 said:

Grumfutock, I'm sorry but if you write something (doesn't matter if it's a reply to a reply to a reply) you should know (and be prepared) to clarify what you mean by that; particularly with your rather ambiguous statements that you have a tendency to make. Put your hands up if you can't do that, but don't try and deflect things and get angry because you don't even know what you are arguing for.

I think you are getting rather mixed up to be honest; I have never said/alluded to the fact that anything you type is about me.

I will try and make this simple for you. Let bygones-be-bygones with regards to our discussion over the last few hours and I'll ask a more straight-forward question that might just give me an idea of what you were trying to say.

=================================================

Do you believe that in order to have any legibility for someone to condemn IDF publicly that they must also in turn condemn ISIS publicly?

Yes or No.

=================================================

Please don't ask me to go back and read your thoughts when you wrote your post, just humour me for a bit and answer yes or no.

(Edited to separate the question from the rest of the post)

Edited by zuby84 on Thursday 21st August 20:35

I will assume that you have now read back, realised what an idiot you now look and that this is your way of trying to wiggle away from it. OK fair enough.

---

NO

---

Edited to separate the answer from the rest of the post. Kept to a 2 letter answer to aid the understanding.

[league67]

Funkycoldribena said:

league67 said:

I always wanted a slightly retarded pet that follows me around. Fetch!

I just like pointing out your hypocrisy.

Tell me this Fido, if I allow you to follow me around, will you be so kind to do spell checking for me? Appreciated, thanks.

[league67]

Grumfutock said:

avinalarf said:

league67 said:

My first language is none of your business. It's a personal info that I chose not to share. Was that not clear?
Are you supporting stoning 'immodestly' dressed women? Or segregated buses?
You think that I'm misguided. IDF is terrorizing civilians of Gaza. I'm not even going to go into 'organizations' that preceded it.
Please, if I sing the praise to brave IDF and accept the truth based on your opinion I'll regain my credibility? LOL.

You brought up the fact that English was your fourth language.
Are you ashamed of your birth country ?
You have no qualms about sharing a fair amount of other biased opinions.
Do you really equate the actions of a handful of ultra religious Israelis to what's going on in the rest of the World,grow up.

Oh for god's sake, it is Arabic. That much is obvious.

LOL, are you wrong 100% of the time on purpose? This is too much, hahahaha.

[Grumfutock]

league67 said:

LOL, are you wrong 100% of the time on purpose? This is too much, hahahaha.

It isn't only a river in Egypt you know.

[Funkycoldribena]

league67 said:

Tell me this Fido, if I allow you to follow me around, will you be so kind to do spell checking for me? Appreciated, thanks.

If it allows me to show up your constant hypocrisy towards others spelling.Woof.

[league67]

Transmitter Man said:

league67 said:

For you, there is no point in reading anything. British Army didn't go on rampage killing over 2000 people, most of them civilians, in little over a month. If they were terrorizing civilian population, just like both IDF and Hamas do, they would be terrorist organization as well. Flag or cause are irrelevant. Actions are what terrorists are judged on.

I understand why are you aligning your views and looking for proof from mentally ill person. I really do.

Personally I think there's a difference between a terrorist organisation and the IDF;



Anyone have a match?

Probably this kid



I'm sure he was displaying threatening behaviour and using colourful language.

[zuby84]

Grumfutock said:

I will assume that you have now read back, realised what an idiot you now look and that this is your way of trying to wiggle away from it. OK fair enough.

---

NO

---

Edited to separate the answer from the rest of the post. Kept to a 2 letter answer to aid the understanding.

Thank You.

But now, I am struggling to see what you were attempting to illustrate with your quote as follows:

Grumfutock said:

audidoody said:

Funnily enough I have missed your wisdom and insight on the ISIS Air Strikes thread where you do not appear to be expressing your normal hysteria about the deaths of hundreds of Muslim women and children. Or is it only when Jews inadvertently kill Muslim people who are located next to people who are dropping rockets on their heads that you blood pressure rises?

Insha'Allah

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

Allahu Akbar

I've probably lost you again by now as it hasn't been a straight yes/no question put to you so I won't hold my breath.

Edited by zuby84 on Thursday 21st August 21:30

[league67]

audidoody said:

league67 said:

For you, there is no point in reading anything. British Army didn't go on rampage killing over 2000 people, most of them civilians, in little over a month. If they were terrorizing civilian population, just like both IDF and Hamas do, they would be terrorist organization as well. Flag or cause are irrelevant. Actions are what terrorists are judged on.

I understand why are you aligning your views and looking for proof from mentally ill person. I really do.

I know I shouldn't try and debate with you - you are really too far gone. But, it's a slow day, so:

1. The Israeli Army hasn't gone on any rampage. The Israeli Army has been involved in destroying tunnels and engaged in combat with armed militants. You will no doubt be delighted that more than 60 have been killed in the process. One tank is reported to have fired shells at a hospital in response to ground fire directed at them from that location.

2. The civilian deaths have been caused by drone, naval and air strikes against rocket launch sites after the civilians have been advised to leave the area (the IDF has radar that pinpoints the location of each launch)

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,

Funnily enough I have missed your wisdom and insight on the ISIS Air Strikes thread where you do not appear to be expressing your normal hysteria about the deaths of hundreds of Muslim women and children. Or is it only when Jews inadvertently kill Muslim people who are located next to people who are dropping rockets on their heads that you blood pressure rises?

Insha'Allah

Dear Audidoody,

Can you please confirm that you now understand that images posted by Washington Post were indeed two missiles and not some weird conspiracy against Jews? Once you do that, I promise I'll answer all your three points, regardless of how stupid and inaccurate they are.

Side not; signing off reply to self-declared atheist with 'Insha'Allah' is idiotic, but not surprising, considering the source. Hope that helps.


Atheistically yours,

[zuby84]

league67 said:

Probably this kid



I'm sure he was displaying threatening behaviour and using colourful language.

Scuffers mode: "Look we can't see the child's right hand, he could be holding a gun for all we know or perhaps even the detonator button for a bomb. Without seeing all of his hands; we just can't draw any conclusions whatsoever from this picture."

[league67]

Funkycoldribena said:

league67 said:

Tell me this Fido, if I allow you to follow me around, will you be so kind to do spell checking for me? Appreciated, thanks.

If it allows me to show up your constant hypocrisy towards others spelling.Woof.

That would be hypocritical if I was claiming that my spelling and grammar is perfect. Au contraire, Laika, I often mock both my grammar and my spelling. But the 'woof' part was funny. Credit where credit is due.

[league67]

zuby84 said:

league67 said:

Probably this kid



I'm sure he was displaying threatening behaviour and using colourful language.

Scuffers mode: "Look we can't see the child's right hand, he could be holding a gun for all we know or perhaps even the detonator button for a bomb. Without seeing all of his hands; we just can't draw any conclusions whatsoever from this picture."

"PS Even if you could see all of his hands, where is your proof that it's not photoshoped." Or "That soldier is actually aiming at terrorist in the same 'vicinity' you just can't see him in the picture"

[zuby84]

league67 said:

zuby84 said:

league67 said:

Probably this kid



I'm sure he was displaying threatening behaviour and using colourful language.

Scuffers mode: "Look we can't see the child's right hand, he could be holding a gun for all we know or perhaps even the detonator button for a bomb. Without seeing all of his hands; we just can't draw any conclusions whatsoever from this picture."

"PS Even if you could see all of his hands, where is your proof that it's not photoshoped." Or "That soldier is actually aiming at terrorist in the same 'vicinity' you just can't see him in the picture"

Either that or the Hamas terrorist is using the young boy as a human shield.

Sounds pretty far fetched huh, but this is what most of the thread has been subject to with some people arguing the toss.

As far as I see it; the 2 most vocal camps to this whole thread consist of:

1) People who believe that both Hamas and Israel are terrorist organisations
2) People who believe that only Hamas are a terrorist organisation whilst believing that Israel are not

The longer this goes on for; the more people/countries (Worldwide) are coming into camp 1. The way I see it, Israel (for it's own political survival) really need to think seriously about becoming the country it professes to be and not a Pariah state where it feels that International Law does not apply to it. It either needs to (truthfully) work towards a 2 state solution or an all encompassing one state solution. Whatever option it goes down; there will be "blow back" [on both sides] but it's the only way out of the mess Israel has created for itself over the last 60 years - "reap what you sow" and all that. However just like all "terrorist" organisations, I feel that Israel doesn't really want peace as being at constant War suits them fine to exercise more and more control over the Palestinians.

If Israel doesn't do the above; I'm afraid my grand kids and Grumfutock's grand kids will still be arguing over this. (His grand kids might also be saying that the Israel terrorist atrocities of 2014 are no longer important because it happened more than 50 years ago;)) - sorry couldn't resist...

[TheRealFingers99]

EU states pursue UN resolution to end Israel-Gaza fighting Haaretz. The proposers seem confident that the US will climb on board.

[TheRealFingers99]

Grumfutock said:

Oh ok in that case what about Kfar Etzion?

Take it up with the Jordanians.

The only relevance the massacre at Kfan Etzion -- in 1948 -- has to the foundation of the state of Israel is that it was re-established on occupied land in breach of the Geneva Convention.

[allnighter]

zuby84 said:

I've probably lost you again by now as it hasn't been a straight yes/no question put to you so I won't hold my breath.

Edited by zuby84 on Thursday 21st August 21:30

Listen mate Grumwotsit has made up his mind that League is an Ayrab. Therefore, in his mind, being of such an ethnic background like an Ayrab makes you anti-Jewish by default.So the conclusion Grumwotsit came to is: it's ok for Ayrabs to kill Ayrabs so League, according to Grumwotsit, has no objection to the killing, but he's very vocal when Jews kill Ayrabs, all this because of his alleged ethnic background which makes anti-Jew by default that's if League is actually an Ayrab!(but according to Grumwotsit he definitely IS!)see what I did there? IS, get it?... oh never mind!

It's a phucked up logic I know, and this thread has hit a new low now because everybody is descending into cr@ppy debating and pointless point scoring, and personal digs, and and and... boring really.

[Grumfutock]

zuby84 said:

I've probably lost you again by now as it hasn't been a straight yes/no question put to you so I won't hold my breath.

Edited by zuby84 on Thursday 21st August 21:30

Oh dear. You inability to comprehend simple posts is something I can't and won't assist you with. I suggest you go and sit in a dark corner and think about it. Take your time, no rush.

[NWTony]

league67 said:

zuby84 said:

league67 said:

Probably this kid



I'm sure he was displaying threatening behaviour and using colourful language.

Scuffers mode: "Look we can't see the child's right hand, he could be holding a gun for all we know or perhaps even the detonator button for a bomb. Without seeing all of his hands; we just can't draw any conclusions whatsoever from this picture."

"PS Even if you could see all of his hands, where is your proof that it's not photoshoped." Or "That soldier is actually aiming at terrorist in the same 'vicinity' you just can't see him in the picture"

I've no dog in this fight, but FFS, that isn't a picture of a soldier pointing a gun at a small child, that's a picture of a small child next to a soldier with a gun. His finger isn't even on the trigger.

[S 8 GRN]

NWTony said:

league67 said:

zuby84 said:

league67 said:

Probably this kid



I'm sure he was displaying threatening behaviour and using colourful language.

Scuffers mode: "Look we can't see the child's right hand, he could be holding a gun for all we know or perhaps even the detonator button for a bomb. Without seeing all of his hands; we just can't draw any conclusions whatsoever from this picture."

"PS Even if you could see all of his hands, where is your proof that it's not photoshoped." Or "That soldier is actually aiming at terrorist in the same 'vicinity' you just can't see him in the picture"

I've no dog in this fight, but FFS, that isn't a picture of a soldier pointing a gun at a small child, that's a picture of a small child next to a soldier with a gun. His finger isn't even on the trigger.

Exactly + heavily cropped.

This should help http://lmgtfy.com/?q=soldier+standing+guard

[Grumfutock]

NWTony said:

I've no dog in this fight, but FFS, that isn't a picture of a soldier pointing a gun at a small child, that's a picture of a small child next to a soldier with a gun. His finger isn't even on the trigger.

Yes but that doesn't fit their agenda or argument does it. I would also state the obvious that a kid standing near a soldier is somewhat lower on the scale than a adult man wearing a suicide vest, but that doesn't fit some peoples argument or agenda either.

Edited by Grumfutock on Friday 22 August 08:08