|
|
#21
09-25-2003, 03:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
I used to think that education was the answer
but not anymore. The era of the soundbite and the easy (and mostly nonsencical) quotation is upon us.
Case in point, Gamblor's "arguments" and the "validations" of them. I informed him that no nation in History can claim the kind of continuity that the Jews claim ("2000 years on!...", etc). Only ignorant and fanatical nationalists mouth off such crap. History, Archaeology and Biology have put to rest such absurdities. And how does Gamblor respond ? By invoking a book written by a neo-Jesus freak ! Isn't this depressing? ...My man, when I want to read a one-sided, un-Historic account of the "2000-year Nation", I reach for Stan Mack's offering. At least, he does it with humor. 
|
|
#22
09-25-2003, 03:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I used to think that education was the answer
Only ignorant and fanatical nationalists mouth off such crap. History, Archaeology and Biology have put to rest such absurdities.
In what way? I wasn't aware your areas of expertise also include History, Archaeology, Biology, among International Relations, Middle East Politics, and Mathematical Logic. Would you care to demonstrate this "proof"? Only ignorant and fanatical historical revisionists searching to discredit others' claims value such crap. History, Archaeology, and biology have offered no proof that you speak of. If you send me an Amazon link I will not open it, as I have 1000 more presenting the opposite as truth - archaeological digs in Israel present more than enough proof of the existence of the Israelites and their exile. Of the Temple in Jerusalem and the Roman invasion at Caesaria. Or did the Holocaust not happen either? Furthermore... I did not invoke Cahill as my proof, would you care to read the other link? I clearly stated, if you'd like to read further... What about being a Christian makes him a freak, other than the fact that he worships a human being, as influential as he is in the modern world (I'm going to hear it for this one)? Is everyone who disagrees with you deserving of such wrath as being labelled a "freak"? Cause if so, my friend, then you probably don't get along with a lot of people. Really, name-calling? I thought you'd sunk as low as you could go.
|
|
#23
09-25-2003, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What About Unit 101? n/m
|
|
#24
09-25-2003, 03:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What About Unit 101? n/m
WikiPedia
Notice it was created to counter Palestinian infiltration into Israel - by Palestinian "civilians" with guns. Notice the disbanding of the unit immediately after the incidents. Notice that targeting innocents became forbidden by the IDF.
|
|
#25
09-25-2003, 10:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No \"probably\" about it
Well what would you expect when most Israelis support the IDF which is a genocidal fanatical terrorist group.
|
|
#26
09-25-2003, 10:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No \"probably\" about it
It's not, but Hamas is.
And didn't Arafat say every Palestinian's dream is to be a martyr? Well Israel should martyr Hamas then--before Hamas drags along more innocent kids and families in their death-wish.
|
|
#28
09-26-2003, 01:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AHA! So this is what it has come to
The only things trying to "get you" from your insides are the spirochetes responsible for statements like these. In an area often marred by the ravings of messianic lunatics, it is actually difficult to find something crazier that your notion that "the moral high road" of condemning Israel's mistreatment of Palestinians is unfair because of things like Noah's flood and "Egyptian slavedrivers" of 1300 B.C.
|
|
#29
09-26-2003, 02:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What About Unit 101? n/m
So what if it was disbanded? You claimed that Sharon wasn't guilty of targeting civilians. Your own source notes: <ul type="square"> According to the local UN officer Vagn Bennike, hand grenades were thrown into houses while the inhabitants were sleeping, and those trying to escape were mowed down with machine guns.[/list]The result was more than 50 civilians murdered under Sharon's direct supervision. Further, Qibya was only the most notorious of many "routine operations" that Sharon conducted against civilian targets as part of an overall campaign that killed somewhere between 2,700 and 5,000 Arabs between 1948 and 1956 (Israeli deaths numbered about 200-300), mostly civilians whose only crimes were either trying to retrieve property and possessions stolen by Israel or, as in the case of Qibya, to be Arabs (Morris, Border Wars). Not only was Sharon never punished for his conduct, he went on to have a glorious career conducting and facilitating further massacres until his cumulative experiences made him the greatest hero of the peace-loving, terror-hating, Israeli right.
And while Wikipedia claims that the unit was "disbanded" in 1954, it also points out that it was actually just merged intact into the 202d Paratroopers, that "the unit existed independently five months, and three more years as a core inside the paratrooper brigade, before being disbanded after the 1956 Suez war." During this period, "the unit's activities were mostly confined to military targets." "Mostly." Note that the same groups that Israeli defines as terrorist also "mostly" attack military targets, rendering them indistinguishable in all but their lower body count from the most notorious terrorist in the Middle East.
|
|
#30
09-26-2003, 09:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AHA! So this is what it has come to
your notion that "the moral high road" of condemning Israel's mistreatment of Palestinians is unfair because of things like Noah's flood and "Egyptian slavedrivers" of 1300 B.C.
Wrong again buddy. That is not my notion. My notion is that one cannot take a "moral high road" in condemnation of Israel's "mistreatment" of Palestinian murderers because, as is common knowledge, you can't judge someone until you've walked a mile in his shoes.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
