babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Two girls, two shots to the head

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Two girls, two shots to the head
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 06 October 2004 04:12 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The two 15-year-old pupils at Jabaliya's school were both shot in the head by Israeli soldiers inside their homes just a few blocks and several hours apart.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1320735,00.html



From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 06 October 2004 04:29 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But they weren't killed in a pizzeria so what's the big deal? And obviously the poor Israeli soldiers simply made an honest mistake and thought the little girl baking was actualy cooking up a bomb . . . and if you're going to sweep the floor, then those children should use something that doesn't so much resemble a stretcher . . . err, I mean rocket launcher . . . and when are little girls going to learn that if they must run away in fear from murdering soldiers, that they must hang tightly onto anything they carry that might be mistaken for a bomb.

So far so good. Looks like the Israeli "Peace" process is working just as it was designed.


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 06 October 2004 04:35 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The United States on Wednesday evening asked Israel to clarify statements made by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior advisor, Dov Weisglass, during an interview to Haaretz that the disengagement plan means a "freezing of the peace process," Israel Radio reported.

What a joke.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 06 October 2004 04:54 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, a joke . . . not a very funny joke . . . already the bastards are trying to blame this on Arafat for not being a "partner in peace" . . . too late though, as the real "enemy of peace" has finally been exposed.

quote:
Israel's Ambassador to the US, Daniel Ayalon, tried to put a positive spin on Weissglas's statement, telling Army Radio that the disengagement plan is not meant to freeze all possibility of a peace process with the Palestinians, but is rather a response to the absence of a partner on the Palestinian side.

Israel Insider

No one is going to be fooled anymore . . . except those who have always wished to be fooled that is!


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 06 October 2004 05:16 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
By joke I was referring to the US demand for clarification. Like they really mean it or would ever actually do anything principled.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 06 October 2004 07:57 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
At least they weren't shot in the back as seems to be IDF standard procedure for shooting unarmed people.

Yes, that was incredibly sarcastic and probably not necessary but as you can see my cynicism has been driven to new heights thanks to Dov "Freeze the Peace Process" Weisglass.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 06 October 2004 08:47 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know how you feel . . . I've aborted a couple of posts already for the same reasons.

Anyone know what Israel apologist holiday it is today?

[ 06 October 2004: Message edited by: No Yards ]


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 06 October 2004 10:52 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The new software isn't in yet.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 07 October 2004 12:46 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Still not in.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 07 October 2004 12:47 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Yards:
Anyone know what Israel apologist holiday it is today?

Now now.

Are you saying you can't discuss this issue without input from Macabee?

It is evidence toward what I have often thought: both sides in this forum complain about the opposite side, but when one side doesn't post, the other side misses them so much they have to beg them to return by trying to bait them in.

[ 07 October 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 07 October 2004 01:15 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Isn't that properly known as "codependence"?

Actually though, it's been asked why the ME forum is so focussed on Israel/Palestine, and the usual answer is that there are babblers to take both sides of the argument (IOW, you can find someone who's pro-Israel, but nobody's going to say they're pro-Baath party, or pro-Syria or whatever).

If nobody comes by to take the pro-Israel side then the thread looks like a circle jerk.

"Help! Someone come and defend Israel so we can say we were just defending Palestine!"


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 07 October 2004 01:26 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, I would like to know if now that the myth that Israel is simply defending itself has been blown out of the water if we can count on the reqular suspects to join the fight to bring real democracy and peace to Israel.

I don't know where you get the idea that I am not pro-Israel? Just because someone doesn't defend an abusive husband and father doesn't mean they aren't pro-family does it?

Israel strives to be a free and fair democracy does it not?

I think we can clearly see that from now on anyone that supports the current Israeli government is obviously NOT pro-Israel, anyone that doesn't critize Israels policies is clearly anti-Israel, anyone that continues to stick their head in the sand and accept that Israel is justified in this crime against humanity is the true anti-Semite.


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Blind_Patriot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3830

posted 07 October 2004 01:37 PM      Profile for Blind_Patriot     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey! if John Edwards says that they have a right to kill and murder children then they do... OK? So get over it. The Palestinians have no right whatsoever for any aspirations of independance or self determination. They must always remain at Israel's mercy. And they must face their fate of extermination and humiliation like the poor victims of the Holocaust before them. It's their turn now. Israel is doing what God would have wanted them to do. Cleanse the Ay-Rabs from the land of Zion. So stop arguing and get back to work.

Meanwhile, U.S. dollars keep rolling in to stiffen Israel's Massive arsenal of WMD, to combat these elementary homemade rocket lauching Ayrab terrorists.


From: North Of The Authoritarian Regime | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 07 October 2004 02:15 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And if nobody's defending Israel, just pretend they are and proceed.
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 07 October 2004 02:28 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nobody's pretending they are.

In fact, the one or two times Macabee's been away, this forum died down to practically nothing, with only the occasional post of news events happening there. So actually, your smear of the posters isn't really all that accurate - and the argument that the reason it gets so much more discussion than any other world conflict is because with other world conflicts people are generally not defending both sides IS accurate.

It just usually takes a few days of absence of one side or the other for the baiting comments to die down, that's all.

[ 07 October 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 07 October 2004 02:40 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Where's the "pro-Israel" voice on this thread? The one that needs countering?

Looks to me like nothing more than a "pile on", but without a guy on the bottom.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 07 October 2004 02:45 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm pro-Israel.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 07 October 2004 02:50 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Then you need to crawl down to the bottom of the pile-on, and let the games begin!
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 07 October 2004 03:04 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sometimes threads deflect all on their own, it seems.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Blind_Patriot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3830

posted 07 October 2004 03:45 PM      Profile for Blind_Patriot     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by B.L. Zeebub LLD:
I'm pro-Israel.
How wonderful. Your a man of peace, just like Ariel Sharon.

From: North Of The Authoritarian Regime | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
YPK
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6780

posted 07 October 2004 03:59 PM      Profile for YPK     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
How wonderful. Your a man of peace, just like Ariel Sharon.

Is Sharon really claiming to be a man of peace, or is he doing what he needs to do to protect his people?


From: GTA | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 07 October 2004 04:01 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Blind_Patriot:
How wonderful. Your a man of peace, just like Ariel Sharon.

Is it possible to be "pro-Israel" and disagree with Sharon? Or is he synonymous with Israel?


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 07 October 2004 04:02 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by YPK:

Is Sharon really claiming to be a man of peace, or is he doing what he needs to do to protect his people?


No, he is not a man of peace. And he is doing everything possible to protect his people from peace and tranquility.


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 07 October 2004 04:02 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Is Sharon really claiming to be a man of peace, or is he doing what he needs to do to protect his people?

You mispelled expand the West Bank settlements above. HTH.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
YPK
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6780

posted 07 October 2004 04:34 PM      Profile for YPK     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You mispelled expand the West Bank settlements above. HTH.

I don't think that's it at all. The Palestinians continually sabotage their own stated goal. If transfer of the settlements is truly what the Palestinians want, then why the 2000 intifada? No, it's about self-preservation.


From: GTA | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 07 October 2004 05:16 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by YPK:

I don't think that's it at all. The Palestinians continually sabotage their own stated goal. If transfer of the settlements is truly what the Palestinians want, then why the 2000 intifada?


Might have something to do with the fact that in spite of Oslo, Israel continued to expand settlements, further encroaching on the territory that could have been a Palestinian state. Sharon at Al-Aqsa was just the spark that lit the fire. The kindling was in place for many years prior.

[ 07 October 2004: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 07 October 2004 07:26 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by YPK:

I don't think that's it at all. The Palestinians continually sabotage their own stated goal. If transfer of the settlements is truly what the Palestinians want, then why the 2000 intifada? No, it's about self-preservation.


Settlement are about self-preservation?

From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 07 October 2004 11:53 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If transfer of the settlements is truly what the Palestinians want, then why the 2000 intifada?

Transfer? Who said transfer? Do Palestinians want to transfer Israelis out of the terriritories or does Israel want to transfer Israelis into the settlements? Which direction is the flow?

And if Israel supports a two-state solution, why do they abet the flow?

Why the withdrawl from Gaza? Oh, yes, to freeze thepeace process. Who sabotoged what?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Patrick Mundy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6576

posted 08 October 2004 01:03 AM      Profile for Patrick Mundy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Palestinians had their chance for their own state when they were a bunch of nomadic tribes when the UN gave Israel the land, however the Palestinians and the rest of the Middle East decided they'd just try to demolish them instead.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 October 2004 01:09 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That sounds like a very poor understanding of history to me. Can you source any of that?

So the UN gave Israel the land. Who did they take it from to give it to Israel?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 08 October 2004 01:16 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The Palestinians had their chance for their own state when they were a bunch of nomadic tribes when the UN gave Israel the land, however the Palestinians and the rest of the Middle East decided they'd just try to demolish them instead.

Did you know that Lawrence of Arabia was a movie. Tell me, when the nomadic tribes of Jersualem moved the city, did they pack all the stones to and fro by camel or on Arabian horses?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 October 2004 01:19 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have to tell you, I think it is beautiful. It is so rare you see a near perfect anything and here we see near perfect ignorance.

[ 08 October 2004: Message edited by: WingNut ]


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 08 October 2004 01:53 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is unfortunate that far too many people on this continent share Patrick Mundy's perfection.

Such people see Arabs as unthinking savage nomadic horsemen (or camel jockeys), and as deserving to be shot dead as yesterday's cinematic Indians.

Contemporary anti-Arab propagandists, such as Canon Films, perpetuate this savage image in films today.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 08 October 2004 05:25 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
YPK
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6780

posted 08 October 2004 05:50 PM      Profile for YPK     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I have to tell you, I think it is beautiful. It is so rare you see a near perfect anything and here we see near perfect ignorance.

"Perfect ignorance" being defined here as any point of view that supports Israel's right to exist. In every case of conflict in this region, the Arabs have been the aggressors. Do you people not see this? Arab leaders have candidly - proudly - proclaimed their desire to eliminate Jews from the region. They will not live in peace with the Jews.


From: GTA | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 08 October 2004 05:59 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is not factual. Even Begin admitted in 1982 that the 67 war was started by "choice." He also noted the same of 1956. It is also true of Lebanon. He made the point at the Israel War College in order reinforce the justification for the Labanese war, which was also a war of choice.

Only the 1973 suprise attack was clearly an Arab agression. Given that its main purpose was to get Israel to return territories lost in 1967, which Israel started, it agressive nature is mitigated.

BTW. What does this have to do with shooting children while they a baking bread?

[ 08 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Black Dog
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2776

posted 08 October 2004 06:02 PM      Profile for Black Dog   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Perfect ignorance" being defined here as any point of view that supports Israel's right to exist. In every case of conflict in this region, the Arabs have been the aggressors. Do you people not see this? Arab leaders have candidly - proudly - proclaimed their desire to eliminate Jews from the region. They will not live in peace with the Jews.

Jordan and Egypt have made peace with israel. there's not been a Arab/Israeli war for more than 30 years. The current conflict revolves around the failure of both parties to come to a reasonable settlement. However, it is Israel that has continue dto build settlements, gobble upland and provoke Palestinian militants. It is Israel who is the aggressor, not the victim.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 08 October 2004 06:06 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by YPK:

"Perfect ignorance" being defined here as any point of view that supports Israel's right to exist. In every case of conflict in this region, the Arabs have been the aggressors. Do you people not see this? Arab leaders have candidly - proudly - proclaimed their desire to eliminate Jews from the region. They will not live in peace with the Jews.


Do you people never engage in context, or sourcing? You throw out these huge arguments, black and white, and just think because you heard it somewhere it must be credible.

What is the Stern Gang?

What was revealed in the New York Times in 1979 about Rabin and Dayan's actions during the war of 1948?

What is a Kahanist?

Who said "There is no such thing as a Palestinian?"

What two preeminent human rights champions, both having come from a nation of severe racial oppression, likened what happened to their people to what is happening to the Palestinians today?

Who was Edward Said?

Who is Uri Avnery?

Who is Benny Morris?

Why should we engage you in any conversation whatsoever, when you are not capable of anything other than basic, and boring, propaganda?


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
YPK
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6780

posted 08 October 2004 06:15 PM      Profile for YPK     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Why should we engage you in any conversation whatsoever

You shouldn't. So fuck off and continue believing the bullshit that you feed each other. Far be it from me to break up such a lively circle jerk.


From: GTA | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 08 October 2004 06:26 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey rather than getting your tights all in a snit why don't you google those names. We have all been through this over and over again with so many people and 99%, Justice is one of the lone excpetions, just tells people to fuck off and stick there heads back in the sand. Fine, believe what you will, but at least read the sources for the information that is being espoused here.

Benny Morris is a firm Zionist, and he agrees that the Israelis ethnically cleansed the Palestinians. He thinks it was right, but he doesn't try to make the historical record pretty. It wasn't and it continues not to be pretty.

Look: You want to make an argument about the factual record that would be great, but this simplistic sloganeering is repetative and dull... dull... dull. Really dull. So dull I could chew my dirty socks. I mean, if you guys could only come up with a new arguement every once in a while. Or? Or even contribute some sourced data....

[ 08 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 October 2004 12:02 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The Palestinians had their chance for their own state when they were a bunch of nomadic tribes when the UN gave Israel the land,

This is prohibited speech on babble, and merits a warning from the moderator.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 09 October 2004 12:26 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Only the 1973 suprise attack was clearly an Arab agression. Given that its main purpose was to get Israel to return territories lost in 1967, which Israel started, it agressive nature is mitigated.

You forgot the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and Israel's intermittent air strikes against its neighbours.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 09 October 2004 03:08 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And why does it matter? How does any hostilities twenty thousand years ago or twenty days ago justify the collective punishments and denial of human rights to the entire Palestinian civilian population?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 10 October 2004 11:36 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Yards:
Anyone know what Israel apologist holiday it is today?

I belatedly found out it was Shemini Atzeret.

If it isn't a breach of Babble policy to imply that all Jews are "Israel apologists," especially in the context of imputing political motives to a religious holiday -- almost like calling Christmas a "Crusader apologist holiday" -- it sure as heck should be.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 October 2004 11:48 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfred Day:

I belatedly found out it was Shemini Atzeret.

If it isn't a breach of Babble policy to imply that all Jews are "Israel apologists," especially in the context of imputing political motives to a religious holiday -- almost like calling Christmas a "Crusader apologist holiday" -- it sure as heck should be.


Wilfred, I'm not the moderator, and I also winced when I saw that reference, but in the context of babble ME debates, most of us would recognize that that was not the intended implication, that the target was much more specific.

I agree that it is badly put, and to any innocent reader appears to imply just what you say.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 10 October 2004 12:31 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfred Day:

I belatedly found out it was Shemini Atzeret.

If it isn't a breach of Babble policy to imply that all Jews are "Israel apologists," especially in the context of imputing political motives to a religious holiday -- almost like calling Christmas a "Crusader apologist holiday" -- it sure as heck should be.


That's not an Israeli apologist holiday that's a Jewsish holiday.

If you're going to make anologies at least make an appropiate one . . . this would be like calling a comment about "American apologist holiday" a slur against Christians. It's not. It should in this case be easy to see that it's a poke at those who "apologise" for a immoral or illegal action by America, and not a poke at all Christians.


I think it's a breach of babble policy though to falsely accuse a fellow babbler of being racist.

[ 10 October 2004: Message edited by: No Yards ]


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 10 October 2004 12:48 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:

Wilfred, I'm not the moderator, and I also winced when I saw that reference, but in the context of babble ME debates, most of us would recognize that that was not the intended implication, that the target was much more specific.

I agree that it is badly put, and to any innocent reader appears to imply just what you say.


Careful skdal, he is just trying to derail the topic, and if you read carefully, and apply proper logic to the accusation, it is pretty clear that "Israeli apologist holiday" is no more a shot at Jews than "American aologist hliday", or "CPC apologist holiday" is a shot at Christians.

I'm not sure what Day's motives are in trying to make the invalid leap in logic, but I will for now assume it was as you suggest a case of "innocent reader" syndrome.


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 October 2004 01:01 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Och, No Yards, I recognized your post as a fierce joke at the expense of someone who is always willing to pull a holiday out of his back pocket if he needs some back-up in a debate. I've had that done to me, and it is infuriating, but also, by now, funny.

The fact remains that it was a Jewish holiday, so to any reader who hadn't seen the routine before, it could have appeared that you were equating Israeli-apologist with all Jews.

I agree: this is derailment, and we should probably stop it here.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 October 2004 01:05 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfred Day:
If it isn't a breach of Babble policy to imply that all Jews are "Israel apologists," especially in the context of imputing political motives to a religious holiday -- almost like calling Christmas a "Crusader apologist holiday" -- it sure as heck should be.

Well, first of all, he wasn't referring to all Jews as Israeli apologists - I think he was aiming that comment at one particular person on this forum, which also wasn't all that appropriate, but I DID address the post right afterwards.

However, I hope you'll stick around and make sure to monitor posts from both sides in order to make sure that attention is drawn to any post from either side that could be construed in any way to be derogatory toward any group. I'm sure you'll find if you stick around the ME forum for any time, you'll find lots of material.

[ 10 October 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 10 October 2004 02:50 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Yards:
. . . this would be like calling a comment about "American apologist holiday" a slur against Christians.

That's just silly. There's no such thing as an "American apologist holiday." Nor is there such a thing as an "Israel apologist holiday." Don't waste your time trying to defend the indefensible. If you meant to say "what holiday is our favourite Israel apologist taking today," which I now gather is what you may have meant, you need only apologize for unintentionally sounding bigotted. (Not racist -- Jews are not a race, last I heard.)

P. S. Credit where credit is due: when I first saw this phrase, I had never heard of Shemini Atzeret, so I didn't know what holiday was in question. While tidying up my desk for Thanskgiving, I was putting away my ONDP 2004 Calendar of Events, and there was Shemini Atzeret, just before Thanksgiving, Navaratra Dashara, and Ramadan.

[ 10 October 2004: Message edited by: Wilfred Day ]


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 10 October 2004 05:46 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

Well, first of all, he wasn't referring to all Jews as Israeli apologists - I think he was aiming that comment at one particular person on this forum, which also wasn't all that appropriate, but I DID address the post right afterwards.

However, I hope you'll stick around and make sure to monitor posts from both sides in order to make sure that attention is drawn to any post from either side that could be construed in any way to be derogatory toward any group. I'm sure you'll find if you stick around the ME forum for any time, you'll find lots of material.

[ 10 October 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


I find it instructive that so many here are trying to defend the offender. Im not so sure Michelle that this was pointing at one Babbler and the lack of any acknowledgement from the original offender must tell us something.

From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 10 October 2004 05:50 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfred Day:

That's just silly. There's no such thing as an "American apologist holiday." Nor is there such a thing as an "Israel apologist holiday." Don't waste your time trying to defend the indefensible.


Oh for fuck sakes, "Israel apologist holiday" was used to express my wonderment that no Israeli apologist had as yet bothered to show up to offer an explaination or apology for the obvious sickening act performed in the name of Isael.

quote:

If you meant to say "what holiday is our favourite Israel apologist taking today," which I now gather is what you may have meant, you need only apologize for unintentionally sounding bigotted. (Not racist -- Jews are not a race, last I heard.)

I have nothing to apologise for, as any reasonable person would have taken my comment for exactly what it meant, and not have bothered to go searching the internet to see if they could find a JEWISH holiday that they could throw in the face of someone talking about ISRAELI Apologists.

As it turns out the offical Israel holiday is actually on the 7th, and not the 6th (when my post was made). . . so maybe you can go search a little more to find some slightly more obscure Jewish hoilday that does actually fall on the 6th if you are so intent on accusing me of being racist (that's the term that Jews prefer to use for bigots when it comes to the subject of Jews)

quote:

P. S. Credit where credit is due: when I first saw this phrase, I had never heard of Shemini Atzeret, so I didn't know what holiday was in question. While tidying up my desk for Thanskgiving, I was putting away my ONDP 2004 Calendar of Events, and there was Shemini Atzeret, just before Thanksgiving, Navaratra Dashara, and Ramadan.

[ 10 October 2004: Message edited by: Wilfred Day ]


No, you actually deserve the credit, because before you when to all that research effort, I had no idea there was a Jewish holiday on the 7th . . . none of the Jewish people I work with seemed to have observed the day, nor was it on our office calander, which marks all the holidays the many races and religions observe in our office throughout the year.


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 10 October 2004 09:34 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Shminei Hatzerth is the eighth day of the the 8 day holy festival of Sukkot. In this 8 day holy day period the first two days and the last two days are observed like the Sabbath. No work, driving etc. Sukkot comes immediatley after Yom Kippur and is akin to the holiday of Thanksgiving.

quote:
Shimini Atzeret - The eighth days of Sukkot, 22 Tishrei. The prayer for rain is chanted ont his day, and it is a festival unto itself, though included in Sukkot. The very end of the Torah is also read on this day.

Sukkot


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 October 2004 09:39 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
I find it instructive that so many here are trying to defend the offender. Im not so sure Michelle that this was pointing at one Babbler and the lack of any acknowledgement from the original offender must tell us something.

Whatever, Macabee. I'm sure it shows my deep, latent anti-semitic intent and that I should look deeply into my soul for it.

I'll tell you what, when Wilfred starts policing all comments that could be construed as possibly offensive in the Middle East forum, then I'll take it seriously, okay? Because right now, I think he's reaching, and making a mountain out of a molehill. And it doesn't surprise me that you're latching onto it.

No Yards explained what he meant. And it's what I thought he meant. He wasn't referring to Jewish holidays. He was jokingly asking (probably without even realizing that, by coincidence, it WAS a Jewish holiday) why the Israeli apologists were taking a holiday from the forum that day, and suggested it must be an Israeli apologist holiday. As Wilfred Day said in his post, there's no such thing as an Israeli apologist holiday, just as there's no such thing as an American apologist holiday. Which is why when I read it for the first time, I thought he was using an absurdity to direct a barb at Macabee directly, not at all Jews.

And that's why my reaction was to reprove him for baiting Macabee, not for being anti-semitic.

[ 10 October 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 10 October 2004 09:44 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well I guess little surprises you lately.

That said, I find it pretty offensive that you would respond in this way. I did not call you an anti-Semite, did not infer it, not even close. But you would start such a flame war for what reason exactly? Please Ms.Moderator we both know your statement was unecessay and provocative.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 October 2004 09:46 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Your smarmy "I find it instructive" says it all, Macabee.

What "all" do you feel "it" says then?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 10 October 2004 09:55 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
I find it instructive that so many here are trying to defend the offender. Im not so sure Michelle that this was pointing at one Babbler and the lack of any acknowledgement from the original offender must tell us something.

Acknowledgement of what? That you are an expert in thread derailment? I'll give you that you are one of the best, but you'll need to try a little harder, seems you have some competition in Mr. Day.


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 11 October 2004 12:22 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Your smarmy "I find it instructive" says it all, Macabee.

What "all" do you feel "it" says then?


I guess it is in the mind of the reader. You say smarmy I say no such thing.

And exactly what "all" are you speaking of?


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 11 October 2004 01:22 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I agree: this is derailment, and we should probably stop it here.

On the contrary, isn't this exactly how it's supposed to play out, here?


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 11 October 2004 02:15 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
I think he's reaching, and making a mountain out of a molehill.

Perhaps. By way of explanation, though, I happened to see the phrase "Israel apologist holiday" in Today's Active Topics when it was first posted, and it jumped out at me as an extraordinary phrase which managed to stay in my mind until four days later when I spotted the answer. No research was needed.

Michelle is quite right, though, that I have neither the patience nor the stomach to start policing all comments that could be construed as possibly offensive in the Middle East forum. Sorry I intruded.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 11 October 2004 05:52 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So, getting back on track, Macabee, what is your excuse for these two girls being shot in the head?
From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 11 October 2004 09:40 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 11 October 2004 11:55 AM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by aRoused:
So, getting back on track, Macabee, what is your excuse for these two girls being shot in the head?

That it was last week and Islamic barbarians have since cut off a man's head and blown up a building killing the occupants; the most important of which were Israeli.

I mean really aRoused, two girls shot in the head is so last week.

[ 11 October 2004: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 11 October 2004 12:02 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfred Day:

Perhaps. By way of explanation, though, I happened to see the phrase "Israel apologist holiday" in Today's Active Topics when it was first posted, and it jumped out at me as an extraordinary phrase which managed to stay in my mind until four days later when I spotted the answer. No research was needed.


Then you should have done the reseach, because my post was the day before the holiday, and was refering to non-action from the previous 2 days . . . so I expect you will a bit more careful in the future accusing people speaking of Israel Apologists of being biggoted, racist, or anti-Semitic,or whatever term you prefer?


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 11 October 2004 12:53 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't know why this molehill is worth pursuing.

quote:
Originally posted by No Yards:
my post was the day before the holiday

Really?

quote:
Shemini Atzeret will occur on the following days of the Gregorian calendar:
Jewish Year 5765: sunset October 6, 2004 - nightfall October 7, 2004.

Your post was in the evening of Oct. 6, and asked "Anyone know what Israel apologist holiday it is today?"


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 11 October 2004 04:52 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Did you read the rest of the sentence, Wilfred, or did you stop there? You are, with all due respect, pursuing a fruitless line of discussion and giving false legitimacy to Macabee's distortions; I urge you to re-think this.

Fuslim recently outed himself as a cheerleader for suicide bombings, and the targetting of civilians; I went after him for that. No Yards? He made a goofy joke based on the fact that Israel's apologists have had a very bad week - until someone went and made their job easier in the Sinai.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 11 October 2004 05:07 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Jewish observance of Shemini Atzeret starts at sunset of the previous day, but the Israeli holiday is on the 7th.

No where did I make mention of anything pertaining to the Jewish religion.

Look, side with Macabe if you wish, but he is the one that demands perciseness out of everyone else, so that's exactly what I gave here . . . a precise coment directed percisely at a precise group, Israel apologists, not Jews, not Israelis in general, not supporters of Isreal and it's right to exist . . . just Israeli apologists

Now take a hike asshole!


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 11 October 2004 05:12 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And how do you define an Israeli apologist? Yes yes I know you are tempted to say "macabee" but if so give examples to meet your definition.
From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 11 October 2004 05:45 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Let me give it a shot; others are more than welcome to fine-tune this for me.

An apologist, in its most neutral meaning, is someone who defends something through argument. Therefore, C.S. Lewis was a Christian "apologist", for example. However, the term has come to take on negative connotations (not universally, but still): opponents of South Africa's Apartheid regime referred to people such as the late beloved Reagan as an Apartheid apologist; people like Sartre became laughable in their role as apologist for the Soviet Union.

It is in this tradition that we are speaking when we lable you, and others, as apologists for Israel. It is a clear accusation that the role you play is not neccesarily a defense of Israel in and of itself but rather a defense of the abuses done in the name of Israel; specifically, the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

This defense takes on many forms. One is the tendency to either a) ignore threads or information which cast Israel's actions as an occupying power in a negative light (how to make an occupation positive, I'm not sure) or b) change the sugject immediately. You went through a long phase of simply insinuating anti-Semitism was at the bottom of everything we thought and believed - and you still owe us an apology (in the other sense of the word) for that, something you have never acknowledged.

Truth be told, the most clear indication that someone is an apologist for Israel is the fact that they argue and interact as though there were no occupation. Settlements, closures, checkpoints, targetted assasinations, civilian deaths, housing demolitions, etc. simply do not exist in the world of the apologist - but suicide bombings targetting civilians do exist, and anyone who suggests there is any connection between the unacknowledged acts of occupation and the boldly trumpeted suicide attacks is "insensitive" to "the Jew amongst Nations".

I wish you weren't an apologist, too, Macabee. But you are. As I have said on more than one occassion, I hope you come to a point where you can move beyond that, and contribute as a person concerned for all rather than an apologist seeking to obscure communication.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 11 October 2004 05:51 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why not try and define it yourself? If it is any where near reasonable I will live by that definition.

To clarify though:

1) It really should be Israel Apologist, as Israeli Apologist would imply only Israeli citizens could be one, which is wrong as a citizen from any country could be one, and

2) It does not mean Jew, although one could be a Jew , as well as Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Agnostic, or any other lable you could care to apply.

There should be no confusion that would allow any idiot to claim the discussion is about Jews when the topic is Israel Apologist.


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 11 October 2004 06:25 PM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sarte was an apologist for the Soviet Union??

He was, however, along with De Beavoir, an apologist for Israel. Franz Fanon's wife, Jose Fanon, had his preface to the Wretched of the Earth removed from all editions after 1967, when Sarte came down on Israel's side (and incidentally, against teh Soviet's position).


From: montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 11 October 2004 06:26 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
Let me give it a shot; others are more than welcome to fine-tune this for me.

An apologist, in its most neutral meaning, is someone who defends something through argument. Therefore, C.S. Lewis was a Christian "apologist", for example. However, the term has come to take on negative connotations (not universally, but still): opponents of South Africa's Apartheid regime referred to people such as the late beloved Reagan as an Apartheid apologist; people like Sartre became laughable in their role as apologist for the Soviet Union.

It is in this tradition that we are speaking when we lable you, and others, as apologists for Israel. It is a clear accusation that the role you play is not neccesarily a defense of Israel in and of itself but rather a defense of the abuses done in the name of Israel; specifically, the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

This defense takes on many forms. One is the tendency to either a) ignore threads or information which cast Israel's actions as an occupying power in a negative light (how to make an occupation positive, I'm not sure) or b) change the sugject immediately. You went through a long phase of simply insinuating anti-Semitism was at the bottom of everything we thought and believed - and you still owe us an apology (in the other sense of the word) for that, something you have never acknowledged.

Truth be told, the most clear indication that someone is an apologist for Israel is the fact that they argue and interact as though there were no occupation. Settlements, closures, checkpoints, targetted assasinations, civilian deaths, housing demolitions, etc. simply do not exist in the world of the apologist - but suicide bombings targetting civilians do exist, and anyone who suggests there is any connection between the unacknowledged acts of occupation and the boldly trumpeted suicide attacks is "insensitive" to "the Jew amongst Nations".

I wish you weren't an apologist, too, Macabee. But you are. As I have said on more than one occassion, I hope you come to a point where you can move beyond that, and contribute as a person concerned for all rather than an apologist seeking to obscure communication.


To be clear I have stated on this board on a number of occassions that I oppose the occupation. And NO I will never apologize for stating what I believe.

If that makes me an Israel apologist then I wear that label with pride.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 11 October 2004 06:51 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by aa:
Sarte was an apologist for the Soviet Union??


For a time. He got over it after Budapest . . . a little late, in my opinion.

From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 11 October 2004 06:53 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hell, everyone was apologizing for the Soviet Union during WW2. I mean everyone knew that without them Hitler would win the war.

More interestingto me is that the Stalanists were the first appologists for Israel, up until about 1951.

[ 11 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 11 October 2004 07:03 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Since the Israeli military assault on the northern part of the Gaza Strip began, 107 Palestinians have been killed, including 31 children and 17 Palestinians in other parts of Gaza.

Lest we forget.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 11 October 2004 07:07 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
To be clear I have stated on this board on a number of occassions that I oppose the occupation.
It might be helpful, then, to expand upon this; not as a litmus test but as a point of clarification. I would ask, respectfully, a few questions of you about this:

1.On what grounds do you oppose the occupation? Is this based on moral grounds, premised on Uri Avnery's thesis of "the moral perogative not to be the occupier? (I ask this assuming that you are not a citizen of Israel but a Canadian who identifies with Israel through cultural bonds; please correct me if that is not the case). Is it rather a position of pragrmatism; i.e. the occupation weakens the security of Israel? Is it a combination of the two or something other?

2. You have stated in the past that you believe the two-state solution is the only moral solution to the current conflict. How do you propose to achieve that end, given the strong settler movement and the Israeli military buildup of the last four years within the West Bank?

3. Opposition to the occupation implies that one recognizes that it infringes on the rights of Palestinians to self-determination. How do you suggest that Israel redress this 37-year denial of Palestinian human rights?

That's enough for now.

quote:
And NO I will never apologize for stating what I believe.
Then you acknowledge that you believe our collective opposition to the occupation is based on anti-Semitism?

quote:
If that makes me an Israel apologist then I wear that label with pride.

That is saddening, given that I have made it clear I was not referring to defending Israel's right to exist; the other option is a defense of occupation, no matter the perfunctory nods to the contrary.

From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 11 October 2004 07:09 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Hell, everyone was apologizing for the Soviet Union during WW2.

[ 11 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


Not everyone. 10 million graves stand as testament to the contrary.

From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 11 October 2004 07:17 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Even many of those killed by stalanists were appologizing for the Stalanists.

Hungarian Communist Lazlo Rajk, purged in 1949, reportedly was convinced to confess based on his duty to the party. At his execution his last words were "long live communism." Such continued commmitment to the ideals were not uncommon, even among Stalanisms vicitms.

[ 11 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 11 October 2004 07:20 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Even many of those killed by stalanists were appologizing for the Stalanists.

Hungarian Communist Lazlo Rajk, purged in 1949, reportedly was convinced to confess based on his duty to the party. At his execution his last words were "long live communism." Such continued commmitment to the ideals were not uncommon, even among Stalanism's vicitms.

[ 11 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


It was the "everyone" that caught my attention, Cueball; all one has to do is read Orwell or a history of the Spanish Civil War or the purges to see that there were many, many committed anti-Stalinists on the Left who suffered greatly for their moral clarity.

From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 11 October 2004 07:22 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Can you forgive my little editorializing exageration? Ok. Not everyone... just about "everyone."

[ 11 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 11 October 2004 07:25 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Can you forgive my little editorializing exageration? Ok. Not everyone... just about "everyone."

All may be forgiven, my son. Thus endeth lesson.



From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 11 October 2004 07:28 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Also, many of Stalin's opponents also spent time appologizing for the Soviet Union. Even Trotsky seemed to feel that, if it were not for the boil that was Stalin, the Soviet Union would be just fine, under his management of course. This of course leads to a whole host of questions {such as was Stalanism an intrinsic failure indemic to the Leninist idea or an issue of Stalin's personality?} which might find a better home on another thread.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 11 October 2004 11:20 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Then you acknowledge that you believe our collective opposition to the occupation is based on anti-Semitism
No

From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 12 October 2004 12:05 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
To be clear I have stated on this board on a number of occassions that I oppose the occupation. And NO I will never apologize for stating what I believe.

You certainly have a very funny perspective on what constitutes opposing the occupation considering the raft of excuses you make for the IDF's charming soldiers.

quote:
quote:
-----
Then you acknowledge that you believe our collective opposition to the occupation is based on anti-Semitism
-----

No


Based on such a crystal-clear, content-rich answer with no equivocation whatsoever, I have to ask why you constantly make sneering references to "looking inside ourselves", or say "You are treading on dangerous ground", or link to news articles which basically imply that criticism of Israel equates to anti-Semitism, or whatever.

[ 12 October 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 12 October 2004 12:50 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Yards:

Acknowledgement of what? That you are an expert in thread derailment? I'll give you that you are one of the best, but you'll need to try a little harder, seems you have some competition in Mr. Day.



Because "derail" is getting boring, and because language evolves with time and usage, may we all henceforth use "formaldehyde" instead?


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 12 October 2004 09:28 AM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hell, why not . . . this would be an excellent way to practice spelling this seldom used (to this point) word.
From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 12 October 2004 11:07 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I asked my mother why do you cry
she said your brother had... he just died
Well I told him not to go outside
he said he had to fight for his country's right
But don't you know that mo-mother
don't you know that we can't stop the violence, no
Because the war is not over
until you can feel love, peace, and hear silence
But I smell gunpowder (pow)
my brother's been dead ever since
I didn't beleive it, but when I saw him I was convinced
Two shots to the head he was already dead Lord,
I headed for revenge in the city of Port Au Prince
Screaming bro-brother
don't you know that we can't stop the violence, no
Because the war is not over
until you can feel love, peace, and hear silence
But I smell gunpowder (Pow)
Zion's gunpowder (pow)
L.A.'s gunpowder (pow)
I wanna know why
Christians pray for a new day
we don't need no, we don't need no, we don't need no
But its still the same way
I wanna know why
ghetto people pray for a new day
hey, hey, heeey
and its still the same way
But the preacher man told me
good things come to those who wait
do good things come to those who wait?
I wanna know tell me
good things come to those who wait
do good things come to those who wait?
we wanna know, we wanna know, we wanna know [pause]
Pe-people
don't you know that we can't stop the violence, no
because the war is not over
until you can feel love, peace, and hear the silence
but I smell gunpowder (gunpowder)
Brooklyn's gunpowder (gunpowder)
Shaolin's gunpowder (gunpowder)
Uptown's gunpowder (gunpowder)
Jersey's gunpowder (gunpowder)
even New Zealand's gunpowder (gunpowder)
Australia's gunpowder (gunpowder)
Brixton's gunpowder (gunpowder)
even New Haven's gunpowder
--Wyclef Jean, "Gunpowder"

From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca