Mind pointing out where I said that? I think I actually complemented Israel's development work.
Winking in every post isn't needed. And Obtuse just pointed out your "pond scum" comment from another thread.
Winking in every post isn't needed. And Obtuse just pointed out your "pond scum" comment from another thread.
And I responded to that comment about gov't wondering how that translated into thinking the Jews should be building the place up.
In other words, letting it return to a desert that nobody else was interested in would be preferable? You might want to reread your own posts.
No. That's not what I said. I said, in essence, that when you hold the popularly elected government of a nation as lower than pond scum it is fair to infer that you feel the same about those who elected that lower than pond scum.
You could probably refer to the argument as a form of a fortiori argument.
From the greater you may infer the lesser. If I am dead you may infer that I won't post on Political Fray.
It is a very common and old argument form.
As for that point on elections, did the people vote on who would be best for them or for who ran the most entertaining campaign?
You'd have to ask them. What we know is that the people elected the government. Without regard to motive the votes were cast, counted and a government formed whereas your comments are mere speculation based on nothing more than a wish to avoid the point being made.
Hamas does a pretty efficient job of that all on their own.
Ask yourself why Egypt built a wall just like Israels to keep people from crossing from Gaza to Sanai? Why have their co-religionists not opened their arms to their brother Muslims?
I think little better of many other elected gov'ts. Unless people are truly voting for their own interests and you have a meaningful turn out, you really can't make that connection. Is Israel populated by a majority a rightist people, most likely. Do they support air strikes in response to a single ineffectual rocket? The demolition of activist's homes? I doubt it, at least not as a whole.
Honestly I'm not familiar with it. Fortiori argument? I'll have to look that up.
Indeed but it's a reasonable assumption.
Hamas is scum that needs to die a vary painful, slow and public death. But alas they hide in civilian populations so you have to play with kid gloves and pull your punches least you inflate their ranks with angry people. Israel doesn't play with kid gloves and we all know how that always turns out.
David, I'm not sure how to explain to another fellow his ignorance without causing hard feelings. Israel is hardly a rightwing paradise, despite what you think. Many of that nation's strongest leaders grew up in what could best be described as liberal, anti-capitalist communes. Where civil rights are concerned, few nations (only the Jews in Israel, and then only the practicing ones, are limited by Jewish religious law) on the planet afford their citizens such freedoms.
Regarding the rockets? We don't live in a Nintendo world, and not all of those rockets have been ineffectual. You might view things differently if you had children, and if one or two mortar shells landed near your kids' school (or hit the school), or if your grandmother or wife was a victim of a suicide bombing.
Regarding the destroyed "activists'" homes? They are terrorists. I suppose you'd complain, too, about bin Laden's cave being toasted?
But we are talking about the one you called lower than pond scum
Well, you cannot know the motives of every voter. Therefore we use the facts we have. The voters cast ballots, they were counted and a government formed. The most reasonable presumption would be that people voted for the candidate they wished to vote for (regardless of motive)
Hard to say. We know who they elected. As such it is fair to infer that they prefered to elect people who are lower than pond scum.
a foriori - from the greater the lesser. That means that if the the larger point is true (I am dead) then the lesser may be assumed (I will not post on Political Fray).
If the people elected the government we can presume they support the people they voted for. Certainly that can change and in a system like Israels it can happen fairly quickly. That it hasn't happened lends further support to the notion that the people support the lower than pond scum.
No it isn't. You didn't infer or assume anything. You speculated with zero evidence to support it.
Actually Israel makes efforts to avoid civilian casualties. Hamas as you note hides amongst civilians. Who is the greater bad actor here? When push comes to shove and the IDF must accept civilian casualties as a result of Hamas hiding amongst civilians or have their soldiers killed that may well accept the civilians deaths. Who is to blame? Hamas for fighting like cowards or the IDF for defending their soldiers?
I still haven't read a definitive answer from David regarding his distaste for the Israeli government, and get the feeling that it's akin to a kid saying he doesn't like spinach.
Heck, I don't much like Obama or four-fifths of Congress, but it doesn't mean I dislike our form of government in the States.
Heck, I don't much like Obama or four-fifths of Congress, but it doesn't mean I dislike our form of government in the States.
In this case, I believe it's a matter of Looey's granddad having been shafted by a Jewish mortgage broker or lawyer, and not liking any of them as a result. These things are difficult to diagnose online, though. I'm still trying to decipher the Mexican border rant.
Back on topic (sort of), I was almost ready to post a list of Nobel Prize winners, both Arab/Muslim and Jewish, but decided to give my opponent a break for a bit. He still needs time to Google and digest poultry.
Back on topic (sort of), I was almost ready to post a list of Nobel Prize winners, both Arab/Muslim and Jewish, but decided to give my opponent a break for a bit. He still needs time to Google and digest poultry.
It gets a little tiresome stating what anyone who is reasonably well informed already knows, but here goes once again.
If we go to Deuteronomy chapter 20, verses 16 and 17, we have the religious mandate for genocide which is part of Mosaic law.
It gives the reason for what happened in Jericho after Joshua blew his trumpet. Namely, every man, woman, and child, except for a prostitute and her family who had betrayed her people, were killed by the Israelites. Their crime, they had land that the Israelites wanted. Who authorized the punishment? Why God, of course.
So obviously, Zionism needs no other rationale, after all, they have God on their side.
Of the religions which have descended from Abraham, we have Judaism, Christianity and Islam. All of these faiths have murderous records speckled with genocide. Tolerance, by and large, is not their thing. Compared to Buddhism and Taoism, they are blood crazed bigots.
Invariably their rationale for a massacre is the evil of the opposing creed.
The Palestinians are poor and incompetent by European standards. To Europeans, poor and incompetent has frequently served as the rationale for genocide. Of course, first you have to add the crime of having something that the Europeans want to the list.
The European Jews wanted Palestine. The Palestinian Arabs didn?t want to move. The requisite crime.
Baron Rothschild had money. So did a lot of other Jews. No, not all Jews are rich, some are quite poor. Poor Jews don?t create states, but they can populate them.
Zionism is the Jewish equivalent of Manifest Destiny. A rationale for taking what you want from somebody else. A latter day version of Mosaic Law.
The Zionists like to point out that there were no Palestinians, just Arabs who lived in Palestine. There is an element of truth to this. The Palestinians never had their own government since the Romans, they were always ruled by someone else. The Ottomans were in charge when Baron Rothschild founded his first colonies. The Ottomans weren?t too concerned. After all, if the Jews got out of hand, they could always kill them. After the British replaced the Ottomans, then the Jews had a European government in charge. The Jews understood European governments. They spoke the same language, money.
So then the Jews came in. The Palestinians protested, but who in London gave a damn. After all, the Palestinians had no money. When the Palestinians got violent, the British suppressed the violence. The British were used to doing that, especially with indigenous people. Hitler rather admired the British, they understood the importance of race.
So then, the invasion continued. If the Palestinians had had a government, they would have stopped it. They didn?t. The British pretended to. Sort of the way the United States pretends to stop the Mexican invasion.
Finally, oil was discovered in some of the Arabian Countries. Great Briton stopped despising the Arabs. The pretense of border control intensified. The Jews resorted to terrorism. It got messy for awhile, because the British military wasn?t used to fighting with its hands tied behind its backs. If it were Arabs, they would have unlimbered the machine guns, but not with Jews. After all, there were rich Jews in Great Briton. They helped draft the Balfour Declaration of 1917. It was addressed to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild). After all, Briton was at war, and it needed money.
Of course, the Balfour Declaration didn?t say the Jews could have Palestine for the own little playpen. Herzl laid his cards on the table with "Der Judenstaadt". Of course Herzl forgot that the Al-Aqsa Mosque was one of the sacred sites of Islam, but Sultan Abdul Hamid II reminded him of Palestine?s value to Islam when he rejected Herzl?s offer to purchase Palestine.
When Nahum Sokolow helped write the Balfour Declaration, the position of Zionism had shifted. The Zionists were no longer after a Jewish State, just a place for Jews to live. It reminds one of the Arabian fable of the camel?s nose.
However, now the camel had a bit more than his nose in the tent.
The game changed. Now there was only room for the camel.
The Zionists got tired of wasting their money on British politicians, they started spending it on the American Democratic Party. Jackpot.
After World War II the Jews came in. Some British soldiers died, but that was their role. The King David Hotel bombing didn?t get quite the treatment in the international press that an Arab bombing would get. The international media has a problem with applying terrorist to Jewish actions.
The Democrats were in control, time for the Zionist to present their bill. It was paid in full. Harry Truman created the state of Israel almost single handed.
Of course, the Germans helped. Somebody had to pay for Nazi Germany?s crimes, why not the Palestinian Arabs. After all, they weren?t part of the Marshal Plan.
Once Truman opened the flood gates, the Jews dropped the good guys, bad guys act. The Irgun and the Lehi, were joined by the Haganah in an orgy of terror. The goal was to drive the Palestinians out of Palestine. After Dar Yassin, the Palestinians got the message.
The charade continued. It was the United States, the Western Media, and the Zionists against the Arabs with a little half hearted aid from the Soviets. After all, as the Six Days War proved, the Soviets were not willing to risk Moscow for Cairo, however, Johnson proved quite willing to risk Washington and New York for Tel Aviv.
Once again, ran out of space. The Forums equivalent of the thirty second sound bite rule on TV. Meanwhile, the United States is saturated with Zionist propaganda. Oh well, when it?s the rich versus the poor, we know who wins. So there is really no need to give the ending.
If we go to Deuteronomy chapter 20, verses 16 and 17, we have the religious mandate for genocide which is part of Mosaic law.
It gives the reason for what happened in Jericho after Joshua blew his trumpet. Namely, every man, woman, and child, except for a prostitute and her family who had betrayed her people, were killed by the Israelites. Their crime, they had land that the Israelites wanted. Who authorized the punishment? Why God, of course.
So obviously, Zionism needs no other rationale, after all, they have God on their side.
Of the religions which have descended from Abraham, we have Judaism, Christianity and Islam. All of these faiths have murderous records speckled with genocide. Tolerance, by and large, is not their thing. Compared to Buddhism and Taoism, they are blood crazed bigots.
Invariably their rationale for a massacre is the evil of the opposing creed.
The Palestinians are poor and incompetent by European standards. To Europeans, poor and incompetent has frequently served as the rationale for genocide. Of course, first you have to add the crime of having something that the Europeans want to the list.
The European Jews wanted Palestine. The Palestinian Arabs didn?t want to move. The requisite crime.
Baron Rothschild had money. So did a lot of other Jews. No, not all Jews are rich, some are quite poor. Poor Jews don?t create states, but they can populate them.
Zionism is the Jewish equivalent of Manifest Destiny. A rationale for taking what you want from somebody else. A latter day version of Mosaic Law.
The Zionists like to point out that there were no Palestinians, just Arabs who lived in Palestine. There is an element of truth to this. The Palestinians never had their own government since the Romans, they were always ruled by someone else. The Ottomans were in charge when Baron Rothschild founded his first colonies. The Ottomans weren?t too concerned. After all, if the Jews got out of hand, they could always kill them. After the British replaced the Ottomans, then the Jews had a European government in charge. The Jews understood European governments. They spoke the same language, money.
So then the Jews came in. The Palestinians protested, but who in London gave a damn. After all, the Palestinians had no money. When the Palestinians got violent, the British suppressed the violence. The British were used to doing that, especially with indigenous people. Hitler rather admired the British, they understood the importance of race.
So then, the invasion continued. If the Palestinians had had a government, they would have stopped it. They didn?t. The British pretended to. Sort of the way the United States pretends to stop the Mexican invasion.
Finally, oil was discovered in some of the Arabian Countries. Great Briton stopped despising the Arabs. The pretense of border control intensified. The Jews resorted to terrorism. It got messy for awhile, because the British military wasn?t used to fighting with its hands tied behind its backs. If it were Arabs, they would have unlimbered the machine guns, but not with Jews. After all, there were rich Jews in Great Briton. They helped draft the Balfour Declaration of 1917. It was addressed to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild). After all, Briton was at war, and it needed money.
Of course, the Balfour Declaration didn?t say the Jews could have Palestine for the own little playpen. Herzl laid his cards on the table with "Der Judenstaadt". Of course Herzl forgot that the Al-Aqsa Mosque was one of the sacred sites of Islam, but Sultan Abdul Hamid II reminded him of Palestine?s value to Islam when he rejected Herzl?s offer to purchase Palestine.
When Nahum Sokolow helped write the Balfour Declaration, the position of Zionism had shifted. The Zionists were no longer after a Jewish State, just a place for Jews to live. It reminds one of the Arabian fable of the camel?s nose.
However, now the camel had a bit more than his nose in the tent.
The game changed. Now there was only room for the camel.
The Zionists got tired of wasting their money on British politicians, they started spending it on the American Democratic Party. Jackpot.
After World War II the Jews came in. Some British soldiers died, but that was their role. The King David Hotel bombing didn?t get quite the treatment in the international press that an Arab bombing would get. The international media has a problem with applying terrorist to Jewish actions.
The Democrats were in control, time for the Zionist to present their bill. It was paid in full. Harry Truman created the state of Israel almost single handed.
Of course, the Germans helped. Somebody had to pay for Nazi Germany?s crimes, why not the Palestinian Arabs. After all, they weren?t part of the Marshal Plan.
Once Truman opened the flood gates, the Jews dropped the good guys, bad guys act. The Irgun and the Lehi, were joined by the Haganah in an orgy of terror. The goal was to drive the Palestinians out of Palestine. After Dar Yassin, the Palestinians got the message.
The charade continued. It was the United States, the Western Media, and the Zionists against the Arabs with a little half hearted aid from the Soviets. After all, as the Six Days War proved, the Soviets were not willing to risk Moscow for Cairo, however, Johnson proved quite willing to risk Washington and New York for Tel Aviv.
Once again, ran out of space. The Forums equivalent of the thirty second sound bite rule on TV. Meanwhile, the United States is saturated with Zionist propaganda. Oh well, when it?s the rich versus the poor, we know who wins. So there is really no need to give the ending.
