or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Humanitarian aid flotilla attacked....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Humanitarian aid flotilla attacked.... - Page 7

post #241 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Why are they fanatics just because they are Shi'i Muslims? Why does that make them extremist?

Extremist from what? Either they are normative Shi'i or they take it further. Actually they are just normal Twelver Shi'i.

I deny their ant-semitism actually. What happens now?

There you go again...semantics. I say extremist, and you say normative. Ba-da-bump!
Let me spell it out for you: You have people in power who consider it their duty--their very purpose in life--to facilitate the Hidden Iman's return. From my understanding, the belief is that His return will come after a period of bloodshed, chaos, etc. These same people are developing nuclear weapons and yes, threatening Israel--at least indirectly.
You see no problem whatsoever with this?

Quote:


President A has drawn attention to Israel's racism, human rights abuses and general policy of genocide. Well done him.

Genocide? That's absurd. As for the other terms, that is your view and you are certainly welcome to it. I won't get into that debate at the moment. However, your response has nothing to do with the part of mine you quoted. Ahmadinejhad is a holocaust denier. I'll say it...anyone that denies or diminishes the Holocaust is an anti-semite. Period.

Quote:

I don't mind if they do actually. Would be the only thing that would potentially save them. I don't think they'll do it in time even if they start now so it's Goodbye Iran sooner or later.

Which is not surprising given the scum driving the agenda.

Don't you understand? Israel would not even consider attacking Iran if they were not working towards a nuclear weapon, and if Iran was not making at least indirect/rhetorical threats against Israel. Developing a nuclear weapon is the surest way for Iran to be attacked.

Quote:


Right. No Neocons. No sir. Just good innocent God-fearing folk down on the farm being threatened by evil muzzlims....


It's unfortunate that you fell you need to put words in my mouth and use stawman-esque statements. I merely asked who these Neocons were. We heard a lot about them when Bush was in office. But no one has named anyone specifically now that we have The Messiah's administration in charge.

Quote:


Right...and we can't let that happen right? I know...let's push Iran into the sea instead then everyone's happy! Bingo!

Yet another example...

Israel = Human (must not be pushed into sea and we must kill those we claim are trying to)
Iran + Iraq + Palestine + Turkey + assorted ragheads = Inhuman (who cares what we do to these)

Here again, you use a strawman. Is someone advocating pushing Iran into the sea? Is it the secret group of Neocons again? Is it the President? Members of the US Congress? The ubiquitous They? I would sure love to know who these warmongering racists are!

Quote:



Laughably, insanely, mind-boggingly wrong.

These antisemites who have total control and want to kill all Jews still seem to be unable to do anything about the thousands of Jews living freely and worshipping in Iranian Synagogues.

Maybe it's because as I've pointed out before (doesn;t seem to sink in):

Khomeini met with the Jewish community upon his return from exile in Paris and issued a ''fatwa'' decreeing that the Jews were to be protected. Similar edicts also protect Iran's tiny Christian minority.

Or maybe there is just no antisemitism.


Source

Or maybe SDW knows better than the Jews in the Synagogues there, better then the (Jewish) journalist who wrote it, better then all the people who have visited Iran so many times.


I never claimed the entire nation was anti-semitic or that there were no Jews is Iran. I never claimed Jews were being rounded up and exterminated. What I did claim is that many in the government of Iran are anti-semitic. Why else would we see such an anti-Israeli stance? Do you believe it is merely the (ever-changing) government of Israel? Or are the Jews incapable of electing a government of humans?

Quote:

I happen to have a postgraduate degree impinging on the area of Shi'i conceptions of the Occultation of the Hidden Iman and I fail to see any legitimate source for this contention.

Could you please point to the relevant Shi'i authorities from whence you derive this idea? Or did you read it on some wingnut blog?

I believe I have said before that Shi'ism is essentially fatalistic and revolves to a certain extent around a belief that fate is mapped out...

Could you please explain how a philosophical system can square the circle of pre-destiny and 'making something happen' by taking certain actions? And where in the Qur'an would you derive this position from?


Ooh ooh me..me!! I've read it!!! Can I answer??? Please?? Umm...what's the question again?? You're drifting......



Umm...ok....



Debate it then...



I think I've stated the issue clearly, but I'll do so again.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3...with-Iran.html

Quote:
The Hidden Imam, as he is also known by his followers, will only return after a period of cosmic chaos, war and bloodshed – what Christians call the Apocalypse – and then lead the world into an era of universal peace.

Rumours abound of Mr Ahmadinejad's devotion to the 12th Imam, and last year it was reported that he had persuaded his cabinet to sign a "contract" pledging themselves to work for his return.

Another example of his messianic tendencies surfaced after 108 people were killed in an aircraft crash in Teheran. Mr Ahmadinejad praised the victims, saying: "What is important is that they have shown the way to martyrdom which we must follow."


Now, I certainly don't have your credentials. But, are you saying that devote Shi'i Muslims believe differently than I've stated?---they DON'T wish to facilitate his return...and that such a a return will NOT come after a period of chaos, war, bloodshed, etc? Further, you don't see a problem with said believers pursuing nuclear weapons in a highly unstable part of the world?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #242 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

There is another ship, the "Rachel Corrie" (named after an American girl who was murdered by the IDF using a bulldozer), heading for Gaza with 500 tons of aid. The ship left Ireland after it was inspected. The inspection revealed that there are no weapons on board.

However, the Israeli leader says that they will not permit the ship to reach Gaza under any circumstances. This has nothing to do with weapons or rocket attacks into Israel: this is about blind hatred, and maintaining the collective punishment of an population of people, which is illegal under international law.

Yes. No weapons...guaranteed! Plus, the ship is named after a girl that got killed. You might as well be the PR Director for Hamas.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #243 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

You seem more reasoned on occasion than other pro-Israel supporters but I still have the feeling you sometimes even find it difficult to support them so unreservedly. It must be hard with some of their actions.

If you can be objective - and you are probably one of the few who can - then you might see what the problem actually is: it is that there is not a level playing field... Israel is literally a 'special case' where the rules that apply to everyone else do not apply.

This causes many things; extremism, feelings of injustice etc.

It is commonplace to say in these discussions "Israel respond to Hamas" or to put "the conflict" in a framework that implies two combatants on either side.

But the two are not the same as in say, the Iran/Iraq war - there is no equivalence because one of the combatants has a literal blank cheque to do whatever they wish.

So what can you do with that?

Look at this current example - an incident happened between Convoy A and Country B. Now if you were to look at this objectively, utterly devoid of context or names (if you can) then you would come to one conclusion and one only.

But because it is Israel then a different conclusion is reached.

You could imagine what would happen if Iran entered international waters and boarded a ship - and yes, let's say that the boarding party was met with clubs and knives. And the Iranians murdered 10 British or US.

What would happen?

You don't have to even postulate Iran. Say the US did it.

What would happen?

And what will happen here?

We need justice...not what I think is justice (being anti-Israel) or what you might or (God help us) the caped-Crusaders and defenders of Christendom above but REAL justice.

That's the thing that will solve the whole Middle Eastern conflict. It's not hard. the conflict has continued for so long because of the absence of it and that's why incidents like this happen. You let you dog off the lead long enough it will bite someone. And if nothing happens it will do ti again....


But why is Irsael treated "differently" from other nations? This is a theory you've floated many times. The fact is that the international community, on the whole, is exceptionally anti-Israel. The UN itself is anti-Israel.

Your British/American hypothetical doesn't wash. One doesn't attempt to run a naval blockade and expect no consequences, or expect consequences for those that did the blockading. You're pretending that Israel's Navy was sailing around the sea, and just happened upon this boat of poor, peaceful activists---only to massacre them. Why? Because they could! That version is just purely delusional.

Their Navy had a blockade for security reasons. The ship tried to run the blockade and refused inspection. They boarded it, were attacked, and things went badly from there. Any balanced person knows this is what happened.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #244 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

But why is Irsael treated "differently" from other nations? This is a theory you've floated many times. The fact is that the international community, on the whole, is exceptionally anti-Israel. The UN itself is anti-Israel.

Your British/American hypothetical doesn't wash. One doesn't attempt to run a naval blockade and expect no consequences, or expect consequences for those that did the blockading. You're pretending that Israel's Navy was sailing around the sea, and just happened upon this boat of poor, peaceful activists---only to massacre them. Why? Because they could! That version is just purely delusional.

Their Navy had a blockade for security reasons. The ship tried to run the blockade and refused inspection. They boarded it, were attacked, and things went badly from there. Any balanced person knows this is what happened.

Quote:
But why is Irsael treated "differently" from other nations? This is a theory you've floated many times.

SDW you treat Israel differently yourself. When we were having a discussion once about the US must attack Iraq because they violated a UN resolution I came back with many countries have violated UN resolutions the one with the worst record was Israel ironically enough. Your position remained unchanged inspite of this gap in logic.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #245 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

SDW you treat Israel differently yourself. When we were having a discussion once about the US must attack Iraq because they violated a UN sanction I came back with many countries have violated UN sanctions the one with the worst record was Israel ironically enough. Your position remained unchanged inspite of this gap in logic.

Do you know the difference between a UN sanction and a resolution?
post #246 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

There you go again...semantics. I say extremist, and you say normative. Ba-da-bump!

That's the WHOLE POINT - it's relative but you are claiming it's universal. You seem pretty extremist to me and there are some of the most far-out whackos I've ever encountered ANYWHERE right here in this thread. (No Names).

Quote:
Let me spell it out for you: You have people in power who consider it their duty--their very purpose in life--to facilitate the Hidden Iman's return. From my understanding, the belief is that His return will come after a period of bloodshed, chaos, etc. These same people are developing nuclear weapons and yes, threatening Israel--at least indirectly.
You see no problem whatsoever with this?

You don't need to spell it out. I understand what you are trying to say and I understand you are very wrong.

You really need to rid yourself of this complex - I noticed it before when you felt you were better at understanding Farsi than native speakers even though you don't speak a word of the (any?) language. Now I see it gain in a closely related area.

Why?

What you are saying is simply not true and worse - you have NO WAY OF KNOWING it is not true and you don't seem to care. I think you need to avoid topics like that.

Quote:
Genocide? That's absurd. As for the other terms, that is your view and you are certainly welcome to it. I won't get into that debate at the moment. However, your response has nothing to do with the part of mine you quoted. Ahmadinejhad is a holocaust denier. I'll say it...anyone that denies or diminishes the Holocaust is an anti-semite. Period.

No, lets not get into the genocide.

Re Prez A: he is not as far as I have ever read any comment of his, a Holocaust Denier in the sense that say, Zundel or Irving are. He QUESTIONS the nature and role of the Holocaust (as do numerous Jews) and I have also read comments of his ABOUT the Holocaust as a historical fact so clearly he accepts it happened.

That said, he could clearly be a Holocaust denier for all I know. What I do know is that there are no comments of his that I have read that would indicate it. If you know of one I am happy to accept it. It won't be like the 'map' which is a question of basic lying....I hate racists and am happy to denounce them whoever they are.

Quote:
Don't you understand? Israel would not even consider attacking Iran if they were not working towards a nuclear weapon, and if Iran was not making at least indirect/rhetorical threats against Israel. Developing a nuclear weapon is the surest way for Iran to be attacked.

No, I don't understand that at all. Why do you think that? Or, out another way, why are you so convinced of Israel's basic goodness? Israel seems to me a brutal society (and yes, I know it well) and we all know the brutality they meet out on a military level.

Of course they would consider it. They would consider it against anyone they deemed an enemy...or who actually is.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that you fell you need to put words in my mouth and use stawman-esque statements. I merely asked who these Neocons were. We heard a lot about them when Bush was in office. But no one has named anyone specifically now that we have The Messiah's administration in charge.

Who knows? They're out there though.... and they are still there, probably more so, with this new Admin.

You don't get it do you? It's something that transcends the Office of President or the political parties.

Quote:
Here again, you use a strawman. Is someone advocating pushing Iran into the sea? Is it the secret group of Neocons again? Is it the President? Members of the US Congress? The ubiquitous They? I would sure love to know who these warmongering racists are!

I think more that it is something in the genetic makeup of the West. The centuries old deep-grained fear of 'The Moor", "The Muslim" and conceptions of "The Holy Land". It goes back to the Crusades and it permeates all levels of the 'Christian' West.

Leaders when they get to power are as prey to it as the electorate. So it happens.....

Quote:
I never claimed the entire nation was anti-semitic or that there were no Jews is Iran. I never claimed Jews were being rounded up and exterminated. What I did claim is that many in the government of Iran are anti-semitic. Why else would we see such an anti-Israeli stance? Do you believe it is merely the (ever-changing) government of Israel? Or are the Jews incapable of electing a government of humans?

Being anti-Israel is not the same as being anti-Jewish and therefore you cannot use it interchangeably with the 'anti-semite' card as you are sometimes wont to do.

I myself for example am fairly strongly anti-Zionist, mildly anti-Israel and very, very very anti-Racist.

This last one btw often brings certain sections of Israeli society into the frame; would be an interesting debate one day: can a nation subject to racism be racist itself?

Quote:
I think I've stated the issue clearly, but I'll do so again.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3...with-Iran.html

Now, I certainly don't have your credentials. But, are you saying that devote Shi'i Muslims believe differently than I've stated?---they DON'T wish to facilitate his return...and that such a a return will NOT come after a period of chaos, war, bloodshed, etc? Further, you don't see a problem with said believers pursuing nuclear weapons in a highly unstable part of the world?

Firstly the Telegraph is a right-wing rag that really has very little credibility in the arena of new gathering and exist merely as a pillar of the English establishment which crumpled old farts can read in their Mayfair clubs while they sink senilely into decrepitude. I don't think anyone takes it seriously now.

Secondly, I am saying that: they do not wish to FACILITATE his return but they do WISH for his return.

This is the problem actually; this whole concept - along with many others - is actually very alien to Islam and derives instead from Christian dispensationalism (where it is rife) and has no equivalent in the East. How could it? The very idea is inimical to the Eastern mindset.

This is a major issue: Westerners project onto the East Western ideals. It just does not work - at the very least it causes conflict but worse, it means that the West cannot actually get to grips with the East....and then they lose in many ways.

The war in Afghanistan would be over by now if the West grasped this. the Russians never did, nor the British and now the US are unable to take it on its own terms.

But let's clear this up:

1) The time of the return of the Mahdi is appointed by God and has been fixed. No-one else knows.

2) Because of this NO-ONE can change it - it's impossible and to try to (ie by hastening it) is one of the biggest blasphemies in Islam. It just is not possible. It's like saying that the part of a Catholic's belief is worshipping Satan.

3) There are 'signs' that the Imam is coming - these signs cannot be hastened in any way (again see above) but also it would be impossible to do so.

One would be the appearance of the antichrist, another would be the destruction of Syria, another is the fall of Islam itself (in terms of corruption from original and also lack of believers).

Some of these prophecies seem to have come true already such as the decimation of Baghdad and the invention of television but there is no way to bring them about.

4) The period of 'chaos, war and bloodshed' is HERE NOW....HELLO!!!!! No-one needs to usher one in...

Actually this last bit is the most disingenuous - while the US and allies are stomping all over the globe spreading mayhem and murder then people are saying "ooh ooh...I hope that Iran does not usher in a period of chaos and bloodshed".



So, that's the belief: chaos and war, AntiChrist shows up, Mahdi returns, bit more war, jesus returns, Peace.

Nowhere is the possibility allowed to 'make it happen'. Nowhere. I cannot think of a more un-Islamic concept or a more Western one.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #247 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Do you know the difference between a UN sanction and a resolution?

Excuse me it's early here " resolution " and it still doesn't change the fact. I'll correct it.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #248 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Excuse me it's early here " resolution " and it still doesn't change the fact. I'll correct it.

Can you point me to the perinent UN resolutions which can be enforced by the use of military force?
post #249 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Can you point me to the perinent UN resolutions which can be enforced by the use of military force?

Steve! I'll try to write big so you pay attention : It was an example of preferential treatment.

UN resolutions are just the background to this statement! It was an example from another topic! But the lesson of this little story is SDW showed different treatment to a country that had done more wrong ( in that context ) than Iraq. Yet he was willing to excuse it in Israel's case. An example! Got it now?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #250 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

...Re Prez A: he is not as far as I have ever read any comment of his, a Holocaust Denier in the sense that say, Zundel or Irving are. He QUESTIONS the nature and role of the Holocaust (as do numerous Jews) and I have also read comments of his ABOUT the Holocaust as a historical fact so clearly he accepts it happened.

That said, he could clearly be a Holocaust denier for all I know. What I do know is that there are no comments of his that I have read that would indicate it. If you know of one I am happy to accept it. It won't be like the 'map' which is a question of basic lying....I hate racists and am happy to denounce them whoever they are...


Specific to the bolded sections of your quote (above) I have to ask are you just playing possum? Because there are numerous instances of documented references of precisely that; i.e., Iranian President Ahmadinejad questioning whether the Holocaust actually occurred! If you're going to deny facts, try to do it more creatively! A good summary of Mahmoud Imanutjob's holocaust denial here.
post #251 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

Specific to the bolded sections of your quote (above) I have to ask are you just playing possum? Because there are numerous instances of documented references of precisely that; i.e., Iranian President Ahmadinejad questioning whether the Holocaust actually occurred! If you're going to deny facts, try to do it more creatively! A good summary of Mahmoud Imanutjob's holocaust denial here.

There is only one quote there:

Quote:
They have fabricated a legend, under the name Massacre of the Jews, and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves...If somebody in their country questions God, nobody says anything, but if somebody denies the myth of the massacre of Jews, the Zionist loudspeakers and the governments in the pay of Zionism will start to scream.[118]

I don't know if you speak Farsi but in this case it is not even necessary - the English does not say what you claim. How is this Holocaust denial in the sense of Zundel or Irving who plainly say it did not happen.

This is not saying that - it is saying: "IF someone questions it certain things happen"

Now you might say it is suspect for someone to talk like this - as indeed it is - but let's not call it what it isn't. No doubt there is a high possibility that Ahmedinejad does not believe in the Holocaust but this is not evidence of it.

So let's retain a shred of intellectual sincerity. Those of us who can anyway.

Btw, Ahmedinejad's view of the Holocaust and its usage is actually a widespread academic view and is echoed by the Jewish academic Finklestein in his book The Holocaust Industry

Quote:
The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering is a book published in 2000 by Norman G. Finkelstein, that argues that the American Jewish establishment exploits the memory of the Nazi Holocaust for political and financial gain, as well as to further the interests of Israel. According to Finkelstein, this "Holocaust industry" has corrupted Jewish culture and the authentic memory of the Holocaust. Finkelstein's parents were both Holocaust survivors who had been inmates of concentration camps.

Of course Ahmedinejad's INTENT may well be different as I say but we are talking about what he has so far SAID. Or not said.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #252 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Steve! I'll try to write big so you pay attention : It was an example of preferential treatment.

UN resolutions are just the background to this statement! It was an example from another topic! But the lesson of this little story is SDW showed different treatment to a country that had done more wrong ( in that context ) than Iraq. Yet he was willing to excuse it in Israel's case. An example! Got it now?

How can it be an example, if sanctions and resolutions are clearly not even in the same category? I don' think you get it. The double standard is Israel is quickly condemned off the bat, before any investigation.
post #253 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

SDW you treat Israel differently yourself. When we were having a discussion once about the US must attack Iraq because they violated a UN resolution I came back with many countries have violated UN resolutions the one with the worst record was Israel ironically enough. Your position remained unchanged inspite of this gap in logic.

I really think you just follow me around and disagree with whatever I post for the fun of it.

Beyond that: The UN is half the problem. On the whole, the UN is anti-Israel. It's not hard for Israel to be in violation of these resolutions when they are singled out constantly.

Moreover, all resolutions are not created equally. And, the UN never gave Israel a "final opportunity" to verifiably disarm with the threat of "serious consequences" if it didn't. Oh, and last...Israel is not Saddam's Iraq. the last time I checked, Israel wasn't run by an oppressive dictator.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #254 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

That's the WHOLE POINT - it's relative but you are claiming it's universal. You seem pretty extremist to me and there are some of the most far-out whackos I've ever encountered ANYWHERE right here in this thread. (No Names).

First I'm a "reasonable man," then I'm a an extremist. You really should make up your mind.

Quote:

You don't need to spell it out. I understand what you are trying to say and I understand you are very wrong.

You really need to rid yourself of this complex - I noticed it before when you felt you were better at understanding Farsi than native speakers even though you don't speak a word of the (any?) language. Now I see it gain in a closely related area.

Why?

What you are saying is simply not true and worse - you have NO WAY OF KNOWING it is not true and you don't seem to care. I think you need to avoid topics like that.

On this issue, you haven't explained why I'm wrong. I merely asked a question. I asked if you saw a problem with someone that believes as Ahmadinejhad does pursuing nuclear weapons. Clearly, you don't see an issue.

As for Farsi, we went through the translation issue. It came down to what he meant by referencing the "disappear from the pages of time" comment made by the Khomeni years(?) before. I say that was at least a veiled threat. You disagree.

Quote:



No, lets not get into the genocide.

Re Prez A: he is not as far as I have ever read any comment of his, a Holocaust Denier in the sense that say, Zundel or Irving are. He QUESTIONS the nature and role of the Holocaust (as do numerous Jews) and I have also read comments of his ABOUT the Holocaust as a historical fact so clearly he accepts it happened.

That said, he could clearly be a Holocaust denier for all I know. What I do know is that there are no comments of his that I have read that would indicate it. If you know of one I am happy to accept it. It won't be like the 'map' which is a question of basic lying....I hate racists and am happy to denounce them whoever they are.

That sir, is complete and utter delusional crap. He questions the number of Jews actually killed. He thinks we should research whether or not the holocaust was grossly exaggerated. Here, from wikipedia:

Quote:
In a December 2005 speech, Ahmadinejad said that a legend was fabricated and had been promoted to protect Israel. He said,

"They have fabricated a legend, under the name Massacre of the Jews, and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves...If somebody in their country questions God, nobody says anything, but if somebody denies the myth of the massacre of Jews, the Zionist loudspeakers and the governments in the pay of Zionism will start to scream."

He's a holocaust denier. Not much doubt about that.

Quote:




No, I don't understand that at all. Why do you think that?

Look at it from Israel's perspective for a moment. They are surrounded by nations that wish they didn't exist (in the least). Iran developing nuclear weapons would present a real threat to Israel's existence, at least in Israel's eyes. They would be more likely to launch an attack to eliminate or seriously delay/downgrade that capability--especially with many of the statements that President A. has made.

Quote:


Or, out another way, why are you so convinced of Israel's basic goodness?

I'm not, necessarily..no more than I am convinced about any other nation's overall goodness. I do think their government, for all its flaws and mistakes, is "better" than the Iranian government's oppressive regime. They are, at least, a democracy. Their society is far less restrictive in terms of personal freedoms, for example.


Quote:
Israel seems to me a brutal society (and yes, I know it well) and we all know the brutality they meet out on a military level.

A brutal society? I've never gotten that impression. I've never been there myself, but I know many that have. I've never once gotten that. I also don't think it's a good idea to judge an entire society based on the perceived conduct of its military.

Quote:

Of course they would consider it. They would consider it against anyone they deemed an enemy...or who actually is.

Well, that pretty much applies to any nation, doesn't it?

Quote:


Who knows? They're out there though.... and they are still there, probably more so, with this new Admin.

You don't get it do you? It's something that transcends the Office of President or the political parties.

Of course. A self-reinforcing delusion of sorts. I would like to know who the current Neocons are that hold positions of power today. You don't have to name all of them. I'll settle for--let's see--how about just 10 names? 5? The fact is that you don't know who these maniacal Neocons are. When did they arrive? I thought it was the Bush administration in cahoots with CPAC and like groups? Oh right..it's the Obama Oil Well Excuse....it takes longer than 18 months to change the culture in the administration. Hmmm. Maybe that's it.

Quote:


I think more that it is something in the genetic makeup of the West. The centuries old deep-grained fear of 'The Moor", "The Muslim" and conceptions of "The Holy Land". It goes back to the Crusades and it permeates all levels of the 'Christian' West.

Leaders when they get to power are as prey to it as the electorate. So it happens.....

The genetic makeup? You realize that if I made that comment about the East or Middle East, I'd be called the biggest racist...EVER. And you've already acknowledged that our disagreement has little to do with my religious beliefs...so why bring up The Crusades?


Quote:


Being anti-Israel is not the same as being anti-Jewish and therefore you cannot use it interchangeably with the 'anti-semite' card as you are sometimes wont to do.

I realize that and make every effort not to use them interchangeably. That said, there are certainly anti-Israeli types who are ALSO anti-semitic.

Quote:

I myself for example am fairly strongly anti-Zionist, mildly anti-Israel and very, very very anti-Racist.

Fair enough.

Quote:

This last one btw often brings certain sections of Israeli society into the frame; would be an interesting debate one day: can a nation subject to racism be racist itself?

The whole country? I really doubt that.

Quote:



Firstly the Telegraph is a right-wing rag that really has very little credibility in the arena of new gathering and exist merely as a pillar of the English establishment which crumpled old farts can read in their Mayfair clubs while they sink senilely into decrepitude. I don't think anyone takes it seriously now.

Secondly, I am saying that: they do not wish to FACILITATE his return but they do WISH for his return.

This is the problem actually; this whole concept - along with many others - is actually very alien to Islam and derives instead from Christian dispensationalism (where it is rife) and has no equivalent in the East. How could it? The very idea is inimical to the Eastern mindset.

This is a major issue: Westerners project onto the East Western ideals. It just does not work - at the very least it causes conflict but worse, it means that the West cannot actually get to grips with the East....and then they lose in many ways.

The war in Afghanistan would be over by now if the West grasped this. the Russians never did, nor the British and now the US are unable to take it on its own terms.

But let's clear this up:

1) The time of the return of the Mahdi is appointed by God and has been fixed. No-one else knows.

2) Because of this NO-ONE can change it - it's impossible and to try to (ie by hastening it) is one of the biggest blasphemies in Islam. It just is not possible. It's like saying that the part of a Catholic's belief is worshipping Satan.

3) There are 'signs' that the Imam is coming - these signs cannot be hastened in any way (again see above) but also it would be impossible to do so.

One would be the appearance of the antichrist, another would be the destruction of Syria, another is the fall of Islam itself (in terms of corruption from original and also lack of believers).

Some of these prophecies seem to have come true already such as the decimation of Baghdad and the invention of television but there is no way to bring them about.

4) The period of 'chaos, war and bloodshed' is HERE NOW....HELLO!!!!! No-one needs to usher one in...

Actually this last bit is the most disingenuous - while the US and allies are stomping all over the globe spreading mayhem and murder then people are saying "ooh ooh...I hope that Iran does not usher in a period of chaos and bloodshed".



So, that's the belief: chaos and war, AntiChrist shows up, Mahdi returns, bit more war, jesus returns, Peace.

Nowhere is the possibility allowed to 'make it happen'. Nowhere. I cannot think of a more un-Islamic concept or a more Western one.

I do appreciate that explanation as its been something you've been unwilling to engage in before. Taking your point about not being able to facilitate/change the time of the return, would you agree that these believers consider it their duty to follow the will of God? What if, in their interpretation, the End Times are nearly upon us? Is it not then a problem for these same people to be developing nuclear weapons? What if they determine it's God's will that they attack Israel or the US with said weapons--as part of the pre-ordained return?

I don't know about you, but somehow I don't think these two things play well together.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #255 of 392
It's interesting debate here. I thought I would add this. These are eyewitness accounts; not fed by politicians and lobbyist who were not even there.

\t
Israelis Subdued Captain by Pointing Gun at a Child

Algerian activist gives chilling account of atrocities

By Layelle Saad, GCC & Middle East Editor, and Ramadan Al Sherbini, Correspondent

June 04, 2010 "Gulf News" --- Dubai/Cairo: According to a report in The Guardian, an Algerian activist, who gave her name as Sabrina, revealed that Israeli troops pointed their gun at a one-year-old Turkish child in front of his parents to force the captain of the Mavi Marmara to stop sailing.

Many reports have emerged from among the 124 activists who crossed over into Amman, Jordan, yesterday.

In an interview with Sky News, IT professional Hasan Nowarah, from Glasgow, described the moments as the Israeli troops descended on the ship.

"All you could see was screaming and bullets. Out of the blue as I looked around our ship, all I could see were hundreds of Zodiacs. Hundreds of Zodiacs full of soldiers, and big ships, lots of ships, and I believe as well submarines in the sea."

Kuwaiti MP Walid Al Tabtabai said the Israelis were "brutal and arrogant".

"Israelis roughed up and humiliated all of us, women, men and children," he said.

Algerian Izzeddine Zahrour said Israeli authorities "deprived us of food, water and sleep and we weren't allowed to use the toilet".

"It was an ugly kidnapping and subsequently bad treatment in Israeli jail," he said.

"They handcuffed us, pushed us around and humiliated us," Egyptian MP Hazem Farouq, who was also on the boat, said and added what he witnessed on the ship "defied his imagination".

"It was hell on the sea. I saw Israeli soldiers killing activists in cold blood and then walking on their bodies," Farouq, who was one of more than 700 activists aboard the Freedom Flotilla attacked by Israeli commandos, said on Tuesday in Cairo.

"The Israeli soldiers sprayed bullets as if they were a mafia in an American film."

Farouq and his colleague Mohammad Al Beltagui were detained along with many activists, who survived the widely condemned Israeli attack. They were released late on Monday after direct intervention by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry.

Egypt was the first Arab country to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.

Robbed

"The Israelis left some of the injured activists bleeding without treatment until death," Farouq said.

He added that he and Al Beltagui had been robbed of all their belongings and around $3,500 in cash. Both MPs belong to the banned Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's strongest opposition force.

"All the survivors on the ship were beaten up, stripped and humiliated by the Israeli commandos while other Israeli soldiers were busy firing teargas," said Al Beltagui.

"What happened is sheer thuggery and piracy," he added.

According to him, the blood was so copious on the ship that some Israeli soldiers slipped while on board.

"We were kept aboard the ship until 3pm under the blazing sun, a situation that made many people, including women, suffer sunstroke and lose consciousness."

The two lawmakers, whom the Egyptian authorities said they had joined the humanitarian effort without notifying them, said they and other activists had refused to sign a written Israeli statement that they had attempted to illegally enter Israel.

"Al Beltagui and I left the detention centre only in the underwear, which were stained with blood of the martyrs, and without shoes until the Egyptian Consul in Israel came to accompany us to the [Egyptian] border town of Taba," said Farouq.

=========

I would call That terror on the high seas by Israel's War Machine, an unthinkable monster of black twisted metal and eyeless flesh with high velocity weapons ::: shudder::
post #256 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

How can it be an example, if sanctions and resolutions are clearly not even in the same category? I don' think you get it. The double standard is Israel is quickly condemned off the bat, before any investigation.

Look. From what I have seen all you do is read what other people say and comment without understanding the context and then you run with it.

It was an error on my part to call it sanctions. Ok A simple mistake. Don't even try to pretend you don't make them. It was UN resolutions that we were talking about. And Israel is the worst offender. SDW doesn't care as much about them as they're Israel and not Iraq. Now there's a double standard if you want one. That's not conjecture it's a fact. Look it up if you don't believe me.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #257 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I really think you just follow me around and disagree with whatever I post for the fun of it.

Beyond that: The UN is half the problem. On the whole, the UN is anti-Israel. It's not hard for Israel to be in violation of these resolutions when they are singled out constantly.

Moreover, all resolutions are not created equally. And, the UN never gave Israel a "final opportunity" to verifiably disarm with the threat of "serious consequences" if it didn't. Oh, and last...Israel is not Saddam's Iraq. the last time I checked, Israel wasn't run by an oppressive dictator.

Quote:
I really think you just follow me around and disagree with whatever I post for the fun of it.

Funny I was going to say the same thing about you.

Quote:
On the whole, the UN is anti-Israel

Or is it that the UN is pissed off at Israel for violating so many resoulutions?

Quote:
And, the UN never gave Israel a "final opportunity" to verifiably disarm with the threat of "serious consequences" if it didn't.

Yes and as we saw they had disarmed! Oops!

Quote:
the last time I checked, Israel wasn't run by an oppressive dictator

No. But it's not run by a perfect angel either.

And SDW none of this undermines the fact that Israel is the worst offender of resolutions so that basically does undermine your oft mentioned resolutions argument. Fair is fair and you can try to spin it however you like but it will always come out this way.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #258 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgknight View Post

It's interesting debate here. I thought I would add this. These are eyewitness accounts; not fed by politicians and lobbyist who were not even there.

\t
Israelis Subdued Captain by Pointing Gun at a Child

Algerian activist gives chilling account of atrocities

By Layelle Saad, GCC & Middle East Editor, and Ramadan Al Sherbini, Correspondent

June 04, 2010 "Gulf News" --- Dubai/Cairo: According to a report in The Guardian, an Algerian activist, who gave her name as Sabrina, revealed that Israeli troops pointed their gun at a one-year-old Turkish child in front of his parents to force the captain of the Mavi Marmara to stop sailing.

Many reports have emerged from among the 124 activists who crossed over into Amman, Jordan, yesterday.

In an interview with Sky News, IT professional Hasan Nowarah, from Glasgow, described the moments as the Israeli troops descended on the ship.

"All you could see was screaming and bullets. Out of the blue as I looked around our ship, all I could see were hundreds of Zodiacs. Hundreds of Zodiacs full of soldiers, and big ships, lots of ships, and I believe as well submarines in the sea."

Kuwaiti MP Walid Al Tabtabai said the Israelis were "brutal and arrogant".

"Israelis roughed up and humiliated all of us, women, men and children," he said.

Algerian Izzeddine Zahrour said Israeli authorities "deprived us of food, water and sleep and we weren't allowed to use the toilet".

"It was an ugly kidnapping and subsequently bad treatment in Israeli jail," he said.

"They handcuffed us, pushed us around and humiliated us," Egyptian MP Hazem Farouq, who was also on the boat, said and added what he witnessed on the ship "defied his imagination".

"It was hell on the sea. I saw Israeli soldiers killing activists in cold blood and then walking on their bodies," Farouq, who was one of more than 700 activists aboard the Freedom Flotilla attacked by Israeli commandos, said on Tuesday in Cairo.

"The Israeli soldiers sprayed bullets as if they were a mafia in an American film."

Farouq and his colleague Mohammad Al Beltagui were detained along with many activists, who survived the widely condemned Israeli attack. They were released late on Monday after direct intervention by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry.

Egypt was the first Arab country to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.

Robbed

"The Israelis left some of the injured activists bleeding without treatment until death," Farouq said.

He added that he and Al Beltagui had been robbed of all their belongings and around $3,500 in cash. Both MPs belong to the banned Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's strongest opposition force.

"All the survivors on the ship were beaten up, stripped and humiliated by the Israeli commandos while other Israeli soldiers were busy firing teargas," said Al Beltagui.

"What happened is sheer thuggery and piracy," he added.

According to him, the blood was so copious on the ship that some Israeli soldiers slipped while on board.

"We were kept aboard the ship until 3pm under the blazing sun, a situation that made many people, including women, suffer sunstroke and lose consciousness."

The two lawmakers, whom the Egyptian authorities said they had joined the humanitarian effort without notifying them, said they and other activists had refused to sign a written Israeli statement that they had attempted to illegally enter Israel.

"Al Beltagui and I left the detention centre only in the underwear, which were stained with blood of the martyrs, and without shoes until the Egyptian Consul in Israel came to accompany us to the [Egyptian] border town of Taba," said Farouq.

=========

I would call That terror on the high seas by Israel's War Machine, an unthinkable monster of black twisted metal and eyeless flesh with high velocity weapons ::: shudder::

Wow, such unbiased, truthful, fact-filled accounts! I had no idea Israel sent its entire fleet. You forgot to post the accounts of the Golem Jews and blood libel.
post #259 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Look. From what I have seen all you do is read what other people say and comment without understanding the context and then you run with it.

It was an error on my part to call it sanctions. Ok A simple mistake. Don't even try to pretend you don't make them. It was UN resolutions that we were talking about. And Israel is the worst offender. SDW doesn't care as much about them as they're Israel and not Iraq. Now there's a double standard if you want one. That's not conjecture it's a fact. Look it up if you don't believe me.

From what I have seen you are either woefully misinformed or completely ignorant in all matters relating to foreign policy, terrorism and the UN. Either that, or blinded by hate and ideology.
Have you ever even read the UN resolutions passed against Israel? Many deal with military parades. Have you looked at who submitted and voted for the resolutions? It is almost all Arab and Islamic states and military dictatorships which depend on oil from Arab and Islamic states.
Why is it those who have no idea how the UN operates have complete devotion and faith in said organization?
post #260 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgknight View Post

It's interesting debate here. I thought I would add this. These are eyewitness accounts; not fed by politicians and lobbyist who were not even there.

\t
Israelis Subdued Captain by Pointing Gun at a Child

Algerian activist gives chilling account of atrocities

By Layelle Saad, GCC & Middle East Editor, and Ramadan Al Sherbini, Correspondent

June 04, 2010 "Gulf News" --- Dubai/Cairo: According to a report in The Guardian, an Algerian activist, who gave her name as Sabrina, revealed that Israeli troops pointed their gun at a one-year-old Turkish child in front of his parents to force the captain of the Mavi Marmara to stop sailing.

Many reports have emerged from among the 124 activists who crossed over into Amman, Jordan, yesterday.

In an interview with Sky News, IT professional Hasan Nowarah, from Glasgow, described the moments as the Israeli troops descended on the ship.

"All you could see was screaming and bullets. Out of the blue as I looked around our ship, all I could see were hundreds of Zodiacs. Hundreds of Zodiacs full of soldiers, and big ships, lots of ships, and I believe as well submarines in the sea."

Kuwaiti MP Walid Al Tabtabai said the Israelis were "brutal and arrogant".

"Israelis roughed up and humiliated all of us, women, men and children," he said.

Algerian Izzeddine Zahrour said Israeli authorities "deprived us of food, water and sleep and we weren't allowed to use the toilet".

"It was an ugly kidnapping and subsequently bad treatment in Israeli jail," he said.

"They handcuffed us, pushed us around and humiliated us," Egyptian MP Hazem Farouq, who was also on the boat, said and added what he witnessed on the ship "defied his imagination".

"It was hell on the sea. I saw Israeli soldiers killing activists in cold blood and then walking on their bodies," Farouq, who was one of more than 700 activists aboard the Freedom Flotilla attacked by Israeli commandos, said on Tuesday in Cairo.

"The Israeli soldiers sprayed bullets as if they were a mafia in an American film."

Farouq and his colleague Mohammad Al Beltagui were detained along with many activists, who survived the widely condemned Israeli attack. They were released late on Monday after direct intervention by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry.

Egypt was the first Arab country to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.

Robbed

"The Israelis left some of the injured activists bleeding without treatment until death," Farouq said.

He added that he and Al Beltagui had been robbed of all their belongings and around $3,500 in cash. Both MPs belong to the banned Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's strongest opposition force.

"All the survivors on the ship were beaten up, stripped and humiliated by the Israeli commandos while other Israeli soldiers were busy firing teargas," said Al Beltagui.

"What happened is sheer thuggery and piracy," he added.

According to him, the blood was so copious on the ship that some Israeli soldiers slipped while on board.

"We were kept aboard the ship until 3pm under the blazing sun, a situation that made many people, including women, suffer sunstroke and lose consciousness."

The two lawmakers, whom the Egyptian authorities said they had joined the humanitarian effort without notifying them, said they and other activists had refused to sign a written Israeli statement that they had attempted to illegally enter Israel.

"Al Beltagui and I left the detention centre only in the underwear, which were stained with blood of the martyrs, and without shoes until the Egyptian Consul in Israel came to accompany us to the [Egyptian] border town of Taba," said Farouq.

=========

I would call That terror on the high seas by Israel's War Machine, an unthinkable monster of black twisted metal and eyeless flesh with high velocity weapons ::: shudder::

Really? Everyone agree this is fact filled and unbiased?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #261 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

From what I have seen you are either woefully misinformed or completely ignorant in all matters relating to foreign policy, terrorism and the UN. Either that, or blinded by hate and ideology.
Have you ever even read the UN resolutions passed against Israel? Many deal with military parades. Have you looked at who submitted and voted for the resolutions? It is almost all Arab and Islamic states and military dictatorships which depend on oil from Arab and Islamic states.
Why is it those who have no idea how the UN operates have complete devotion and faith in said organization?

Quote:
From what I have seen you are either woefully misinformed or completely ignorant in all matters relating to foreign policy, terrorism and the UN. Either that, or blinded by hate and ideology.

Funny that! I was just about to say the same thing about you!

Stevie the law is the law and resolutions are resolutions. If they aren't that important you shouldn't base an argument about starting a war on them ( you might want to share this with SDW ).

Quote:
Why is it those who have no idea how the UN operates have complete devotion and faith in said organization?

Well to be honest I have more faith in them than I do you.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #262 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Funny that! I was just about to say the same thing about you!

Stevie the law is the law and resolutions are resolutions. If they aren't that important you shouldn't base an argument about starting a war on them ( you might want to share this with SDW ).



Well to be honest I have more faith in them than I do you.

I didn't say anything concerning resolutions and war. Iraq violated 17 UN mandates. Not that you would know what a mandate is. You do know nearly all the resolutions passed against Israel are General Assembly resolutions, while those passed against Iraq were Security Council resolutions? Do you know the difference between the 2? Of course you don't.

Who is this SDW you seem to be obsessed with?

I imagine you would love the US to be governed by the UN.
post #263 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

I didn't say anything concerning resolutions and war. Iraq violated 17 UN mandates. Not that you would know what a mandate is. You do know nearly all the resolutions passed against Israel are General Assembly resolutions, while those passed against Iraq were Security Council resolutions? Do you know the difference between the 2? Of course you don't.

Who is this SDW you seem to be obsessed with?

I imagine you would love the US to be governed by the UN.

Quote:
I didn't say anything concerning resolutions and war.

No but SDW did. That's what you were commenting on without understanding the conversation remember?

Quote:
Not that you would know what a mandate is. You do know nearly all the resolutions passed against Israel are General Assembly resolutions, while those passed against Iraq were Security Council resolutions?

Sigh! You're just digging yourself deeper! Like I've said SDW based his argument of why we invaded on UN resolutions that Iraq vilolated. Israel has violated more. Double standard and end of story. Now if you're really interested do a search for the conversation with SDW and myself that took place years ago. I'm not doing it for you.

Quote:
Who is this SDW you seem to be obsessed with?

Try reading the rest of the thread you're posting in.

For all I know you and he could be one and the same with a different handle.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #264 of 392
Thread Starter 
LINK TO STORY Autopsy shows Gaza activists were hit 30 times: report.

Quote:
The autopsy results showed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back, the Guardian said.
A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has U.S. citizenship, was shot five times from less than 45 cm (18 inches) away, in the face, the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back, it said.
Two other men were shot four times. Five of those killed were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, the Guardian quoted Buyuk as saying.
In addition to those killed, 48 others suffered gunshot wounds and six activists were still missing, he added.

The victims probably grabbed what they could (knives and clubs) to defend themselves against the terrorists. This clearly was not a "police action" by the Israelis, but more a death squad bent on cold blooded murder. They shot these people in the back and in the head. Others were thrown overboard and are still missing. We the US taxpayer cough up and pay these animals $3 billion a year.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #265 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

You seem more reasoned on occasion than other pro-Israel supporters but I still have the feeling you sometimes even find it difficult to support them so unreservedly. It must be hard with some of their actions.

If you can be objective - and you are probably one of the few who can - then you might see what the problem actually is: it is that there is not a level playing field... Israel is literally a 'special case' where the rules that apply to everyone else do not apply.

This causes many things; extremism, feelings of injustice etc.

It is commonplace to say in these discussions "Israel respond to Hamas" or to put "the conflict" in a framework that implies two combatants on either side.

But the two are not the same as in say, the Iran/Iraq war - there is no equivalence because one of the combatants has a literal blank cheque to do whatever they wish.

So what can you do with that?

Look at this current example - an incident happened between Convoy A and Country B. Now if you were to look at this objectively, utterly devoid of context or names (if you can) then you would come to one conclusion and one only.

But because it is Israel then a different conclusion is reached.

You could imagine what would happen if Iran entered international waters and boarded a ship - and yes, let's say that the boarding party was met with clubs and knives. And the Iranians murdered 10 British or US.

What would happen?

You don't have to even postulate Iran. Say the US did it.

What would happen?

And what will happen here?

We need justice...not what I think is justice (being anti-Israel) or what you might or (God help us) the caped-Crusaders and defenders of Christendom above but REAL justice.

That's the thing that will solve the whole Middle Eastern conflict. It's not hard. the conflict has continued for so long because of the absence of it and that's why incidents like this happen. You let you dog off the lead long enough it will bite someone. And if nothing happens it will do ti again....

There is a whole lot of blame that can be passed around to everyone involved. My great-uncle worked turning unused swampland into fertile ground in the 1930s in then Palestine. The grandfathers and grandmothers of many, many Israelis put their blood, sweat, and tears into taming land that the Arabs never used. Pretending that the current Palestinians have any sort of claim to those lands just isn't right. There are other lands, however, that were vacated: some willingly and some by force. There were promises made to the Jewish people for all the land of British Palestine (including what is now Jordan). Jordan, which only got their independence two years before that of Israel's, isn't even ruled by a local dynasty. The first king of Jordan was Saudi and in order to prevent him from attacking British allies in Syria, Churchill gave away 2/3 of what was promised to the Jewish people to this Saudi invader.

The situation is much more complicated than Israel is evil, Palestinians are oppressed.

Israel has done more than it's fair share of overreacting of late. But the Palestinians themselves as well as other Arab nations have done their fair share of provoking. To deny either of these statements is plain partisan blindness. To be honest, I think much of the recent (as in the last decade) attacks on Israel (rocket attacks and the like) and the current attempts at running the blockades are as much about provoking Israel into overreacting to win the PR war as they are about helping the Palestinians themselves.

Remember, if the rest of the Arab world really gave a shit about the Palestinians, they would have let the refugees into their countries. The Palestinians are more useful to the Arab world as oppressed pawns in this campaign against Israel than they are as citizens of the various Arab countries. When Israel gave Sinai back to Egypt, they also tried to give Gaza back as well. Egypt didn't want Gaza. Imagine a world where Egypt took Gaza back. So much pain and suffering could have been avoided.

It's nice to say let's remove all the labels and all the history and look at this recent blockade incident in a vacuum. But the point is the situation is much, much more complicated than that.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #266 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

There is a whole lot of blame that can be passed around to everyone involved. My great-uncle worked turning unused swampland into fertile ground in the 1930s in then Palestine. The grandfathers and grandmothers of many, many Israelis put their blood, sweat, and tears into taming land that the Arabs never used. Pretending that the current Palestinians have any sort of claim to those lands just isn't right. There are other lands, however, that were vacated: some willingly and some by force. There were promises made to the Jewish people for all the land of British Palestine (including what is now Jordan). Jordan, which only got their independence two years before that of Israel's, isn't even ruled by a local dynasty. The first king of Jordan was Saudi and in order to prevent him from attacking British allies in Syria, Churchill gave away 2/3 of what was promised to the Jewish people to this Saudi invader.

The situation is much more complicated than Israel is evil, Palestinians are oppressed.

Israel has done more than it's fair share of overreacting of late. But the Palestinians themselves as well as other Arab nations have done their fair share of provoking. To deny either of these statements is plain partisan blindness. To be honest, I think much of the recent (as in the last decade) attacks on Israel (rocket attacks and the like) and the current attempts at running the blockades are as much about provoking Israel into overreacting to win the PR war as they are about helping the Palestinians themselves.

Remember, if the rest of the Arab world really gave a shit about the Palestinians, they would have let the refugees into their countries. The Palestinians are more useful to the Arab world as oppressed pawns in this campaign against Israel than they are as citizens of the various Arab countries. When Israel gave Sinai back to Egypt, they also tried to give Gaza back as well. Egypt didn't want Gaza. Imagine a world where Egypt took Gaza back. So much pain and suffering could have been avoided.

It's nice to say let's remove all the labels and all the history and look at this recent blockade incident in a vacuum. But the point is the situation is much, much more complicated than that.

Thank you for that very well spoken and insightful post. Hope you don't mind me saying it was quite refreshing amidst all the crap floating in this thread.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #267 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

LINK TO STORY Autopsy shows Gaza activists were hit 30 times: report.



The victims probably grabbed what they could (knives and clubs) to defend themselves against the terrorists. This clearly was not a "police action" by the Israelis, but more a death squad bent on cold blooded murder. They shot these people in the back and in the head. Others were thrown overboard and are still missing. We the US taxpayer cough up and pay these animals $3 billion a year.

That is the narrative that works for you. Always.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #268 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I do appreciate that explanation as its been something you've been unwilling to engage in before. Taking your point about not being able to facilitate/change the time of the return, would you agree that these believers consider it their duty to follow the will of God? What if, in their interpretation, the End Times are nearly upon us? Is it not then a problem for these same people to be developing nuclear weapons? What if they determine it's God's will that they attack Israel or the US with said weapons--as part of the pre-ordained return?

I don't know about you, but somehow I don't think these two things play well together.

I think that the idea is that everything is the will of God. Whatever you do.

This is what I meant earlier that the West does not really understand the Easts conception. In the West, in a religious context, when something 'bad' happens then this is often attributed to the work of Satan or 'evil' but in Islam this is not the case as there is no opposite force to God in that sense nor can there be.

Satan himself is a very different character in Islam and not necessarily evil and sometimes even regarded as 'Good' certainly he has no power as such and is not a force that can challenge God. So when something happens - good or bad - then it is God's will by definition.

So it is not a duty as such to follow the will of God - if you follow it is God's will you do, if you don't it is God's will you don't. This is quite clear in the Qur'an.

Having said that I have to concede that to some degree you may have a point and there is a possibility that some Muslims may not actually act in accordance with this (whether Prez A falls in this category is debatable) but clearly Islamists of all kinds who want to 'make something happen' by violent means are acting against Islam and the Qur'an but this does not stop them.

It is bad theology actually - if God is all powerful and can do anything and all is His will then it follows that if (say for the sake of the current argument) Israel exists then it is clearly His will it does so. To try to change that is actually going against God and thus not really Muslims but they don't see it that way although imo they are wrong.

Where Prez A stands in relation to such beliefs I am not sure. I only know what the Shi'i beliefs are SUPPOSED to be. He may well have some heretic version of his own though I doubt it but to be fair to you, I suppose it is possible.

[QUOTE=BR;1646226]There were promises made to the Jewish people for all the land of British Palestine (including what is now Jordan). Jordan, which only got their independence two years before that of Israel's, isn't even ruled by a local dynasty. The first king of Jordan was Saudi and in order to prevent him from attacking British allies in Syria, Churchill gave away 2/3 of what was promised to the Jewish people to this Saudi invader.[quote]

That's the point though isn't it? The reasons for the promises were self-interest belonging to another era - they no longer apply and that's why there is a problem. One of the reasons.

Did they even have the right to dictate in this way? No.

Quote:
Israel has done more than it's fair share of overreacting of late. But the Palestinians themselves as well as other Arab nations have done their fair share of provoking. To deny either of these statements is plain partisan blindness.

It's a war though isn't it?

Quote:
Remember, if the rest of the Arab world really gave a shit about the Palestinians, they would have let the refugees into their countries. The Palestinians are more useful to the Arab world as oppressed pawns in this campaign against Israel than they are as citizens of the various Arab countries. When Israel gave Sinai back to Egypt, they also tried to give Gaza back as well. Egypt didn't want Gaza. Imagine a world where Egypt took Gaza back. So much pain and suffering could have been avoided.

Very true...but thats a different story and this veers of into why there is a rise in Islamism and radical terrorism. Essentially the reason these Arab nations act the wy they do is to get a seat at the table along with the high-fliers of the West.

And the price of admission is some degree of Westernisation as well as support for Western adventures in the region and elsewhere.

The more radical of the citizens of these nations do not stand for that and attack the Arab nations and the West. But this is the reason for it. I do not believe the West would be the recipient of Islamist terror if some Arab Nations were not allies. It would be confined to Saudi and the Islamic World.

Quote:
It's nice to say let's remove all the labels and all the history and look at this recent blockade incident in a vacuum. But the point is the situation is much, much more complicated than that.

Of course. But it is a snapshot that shows why things happen. It is because Israel thinks it is ok to solve issues in this way that we are where we are.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #269 of 392
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

That is the narrative that works for you. Always.

No, it has never *worked* for me.... never. The only narrative that would *work* would be that the US apply the same standard to each side when it comes to applying pressure. For decades, both sides have been doing bad deeds, but only one side is being punished. The duplicity is an outrage, sparked by the racist viewpoint of (many people) who have formulated US policy in the region for decades, and who who appear to be of the opinion that an Israeli/Jewish life is worth more than that of a Palestinian/Arab. The ongoing one-sided, factually cherry-picked and wholly inaccurate presentation of the conflict by the US corporate media only adds to the duplicitous status quo, and resonates with the general mainstream US viewpoint which has evolved over the last 4 decades or more.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #270 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Wow, such unbiased, truthful, fact-filled accounts! I had no idea Israel sent its entire fleet. You forgot to post the accounts of the Golem Jews and blood libel.

I'm sorry, I don't understand.

I never consider people of Israel a religious issue. Israel and leadership, like any other country in world, has responsibilities. It is there action that defines them. It is here action that is widelyand rightfullycondemn.




This is what Max Blumenthal says.

It was in the article "Pariah Nation" By ALEXANDER COCKBURN.


The attack on the Mavi Marmara was carefully planned. As Max Blumenthal reports on his website,

Tel Aviv-Israel Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his senior ministers have attempted to blame army commanders for the bungled raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla, according to the UKs Daily Telegraph.

But was the raid really bungled? Did the Israeli military command and Netanyahu government have no clear strategy going in? Or was the violence they meted out against the flotilla activists deliberate and methodically planned?

Statements by senior Israeli military commanders made in the Hebrew media days before the massacre revealed that the raid was planned over a week in advance by the Israeli military and was personally approved by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Ehud Barak. Details of the plan show that the use of deadly force was authorized and calculated.

The massacre of activists should not have been unexpected.


On May 28, three days before the raid, top Israeli military officials revealed details of their strategy to Maariv, Israels most widely circulated paper. The caption of the Maariv article reflected the military commands plan to use force: On the way to violence; one of the boats is on its way.

In the opinion of much of the world, Israel is descending to the status of South Africa in the final years of apartheid (in which period, it has just emerged, Israel was trying to sell South Africa nuclear weapons) a pariah nation.

Those people needn't to die. They were their to save lives; to provided much relief to the people of Gaza. And their children.

======
post #271 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgknight View Post

I'm sorry, I don't understand.

I never consider people of Israel a religious issue. Israel and leadership, like any other country in world, has responsibilities. It is there action that defines them. It is here action that is widelyand rightfullycondemn.




This is what Max Blumenthal says.

It was in the article "Pariah Nation" By ALEXANDER COCKBURN.


The attack on the Mavi Marmara was carefully planned. As Max Blumenthal reports on his website,

Tel Aviv-Israel Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his senior ministers have attempted to blame army commanders for the bungled raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla, according to the UKs Daily Telegraph.

But was the raid really bungled? Did the Israeli military command and Netanyahu government have no clear strategy going in? Or was the violence they meted out against the flotilla activists deliberate and methodically planned?

Statements by senior Israeli military commanders made in the Hebrew media days before the massacre revealed that the raid was planned over a week in advance by the Israeli military and was personally approved by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Ehud Barak. Details of the plan show that the use of deadly force was authorized and calculated.

The massacre of activists should not have been unexpected.


On May 28, three days before the raid, top Israeli military officials revealed details of their strategy to Maariv, Israels most widely circulated paper. The caption of the Maariv article reflected the military commands plan to use force: On the way to violence; one of the boats is on its way.

In the opinion of much of the world, Israel is descending to the status of South Africa in the final years of apartheid (in which period, it has just emerged, Israel was trying to sell South Africa nuclear weapons) a pariah nation.

Those people needn't to die. They were their to save lives; to provided much relief to the people of Gaza. And their children.

======

No, you certainly don't.

Of course they planned the raid- that's why only 10 terror supporters were killed. The terrorist flotilla advertised their intentions. Israel and Egypt tried to make arrangements for the aid and dual use supplies to be offloaded at ports in either Egypt or Israel, but that wouldn't fit in with the purpose of the flotilla- martyrdom, establish Turkey's place in the Islamic world, and sit back and watch the rest of the world condemn Israel. The planners of the flotilla got everything they wanted, but certainly not what they deserved.

What evidence do you have Israel was trying to sell S. Africa nuclear weapons? There isn't even any concrete evidence Israel has its own nuclear weapons.
post #272 of 392
I wonder if the Israeli's will shoot the Iranian Revolutionary Guard through the top of the head as they descend from helicopters?

"Iran's Revolutionary Guard naval forces are prepared to escort the peace and freedom convoys that carry humanitarian assistance for the defenceless and oppressed people of Gaza with all their strength," pledged Hojjatoleslam Ali Shirazi, Khamenei's personal representative to the guards corps.
~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...ran-aid-convoy
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #273 of 392
If Iran wants war with Israel and the US, it's their deaths.
post #274 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

If Iran wants war with Israel and the US, it's their deaths.

Context?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #275 of 392
If Iranian ships guide the next 'aid' flotilla to Gaza, bust the blockade and enter Israeli waters, it is war. Regardless of how apathetic the Obama Admin has been toward Israel of late, they are our only ally in the region, and the US will commit military force to defend them.
post #276 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Steve! I'll try to write big so you pay attention : It was an example of preferential treatment.

UN resolutions are just the background to this statement! It was an example from another topic! But the lesson of this little story is SDW showed different treatment to a country that had done more wrong ( in that context ) than Iraq. Yet he was willing to excuse it in Israel's case. An example! Got it now?

Done more wrong? You act as if all UN resolutions are the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

From what I have seen you are either woefully misinformed or completely ignorant in all matters relating to foreign policy, terrorism and the UN. Either that, or blinded by hate and ideology.
Have you ever even read the UN resolutions passed against Israel? Many deal with military parades. Have you looked at who submitted and voted for the resolutions? It is almost all Arab and Islamic states and military dictatorships which depend on oil from Arab and Islamic states.
Why is it those who have no idea how the UN operates have complete devotion and faith in said organization?

Exactly. He doesn't care though. "Israel violated US resolutions" is all he reads or hears.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Look. From what I have seen all you do is read what other people say and comment without understanding the context and then you run with it.

It was an error on my part to call it sanctions. Ok A simple mistake. Don't even try to pretend you don't make them. It was UN resolutions that we were talking about. And Israel is the worst offender. SDW doesn't care as much about them as they're Israel and not Iraq. Now there's a double standard if you want one. That's not conjecture it's a fact. Look it up if you don't believe me.

No, jimmac. They are not "the worst offender" because MANY of the resolutions are not even from the security council. You simply have no idea what you're talking about.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

There is a whole lot of blame that can be passed around to everyone involved. My great-uncle worked turning unused swampland into fertile ground in the 1930s in then Palestine. The grandfathers and grandmothers of many, many Israelis put their blood, sweat, and tears into taming land that the Arabs never used. Pretending that the current Palestinians have any sort of claim to those lands just isn't right. There are other lands, however, that were vacated: some willingly and some by force. There were promises made to the Jewish people for all the land of British Palestine (including what is now Jordan). Jordan, which only got their independence two years before that of Israel's, isn't even ruled by a local dynasty. The first king of Jordan was Saudi and in order to prevent him from attacking British allies in Syria, Churchill gave away 2/3 of what was promised to the Jewish people to this Saudi invader.

The situation is much more complicated than Israel is evil, Palestinians are oppressed.

Israel has done more than it's fair share of overreacting of late. But the Palestinians themselves as well as other Arab nations have done their fair share of provoking. To deny either of these statements is plain partisan blindness. To be honest, I think much of the recent (as in the last decade) attacks on Israel (rocket attacks and the like) and the current attempts at running the blockades are as much about provoking Israel into overreacting to win the PR war as they are about helping the Palestinians themselves.

Remember, if the rest of the Arab world really gave a shit about the Palestinians, they would have let the refugees into their countries. The Palestinians are more useful to the Arab world as oppressed pawns in this campaign against Israel than they are as citizens of the various Arab countries. When Israel gave Sinai back to Egypt, they also tried to give Gaza back as well. Egypt didn't want Gaza. Imagine a world where Egypt took Gaza back. So much pain and suffering could have been avoided.

It's nice to say let's remove all the labels and all the history and look at this recent blockade incident in a vacuum. But the point is the situation is much, much more complicated than that.

Excellent post. Could not have said it better.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #277 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

If Iran wants war with Israel and the US, it's their deaths.

Short of Israel going nuclear they could not win that confrontation.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #278 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Short of Israel going nuclear they could not win that confrontation.

You want that to happen? (War not the nuclear option.) Israel has surprised people before with how well it did in battle. So I doubt it is that cut and dried. But whatever the case, not really worth speculating on. Iran should not push on this.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #279 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Short of Israel going nuclear they could not win that confrontation.

I think Iran is going too far here. There are better ways of pushing for change than risking a war, though some in the US and Israel seem hell bent on that idea anyway.

What do you think Turkey response would be? They've been close to Europe and the US, but anger at Israel is high.

Why do you think Israel and presumably a host of other countries, couldn't win a war with Iran without nuclear weapons? War with Iran would be an immense affair, even if they didn't have allies, but still.

My guess is that North Korea would be brought into it, but that will depend on what actions the US takes over the torpedo affair.

Sorry for all the questions but you seem to have excellent knowledge regarding these issues.
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #280 of 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Done more wrong? You act as if all UN resolutions are the same.


.

He clearly doesn't know the difference between General Assembly resolutions, Security Council resolutions and mandates. He seems to believe GA resolutions dealing with Israeli parades in Jerusalem hold the same weight as SC resolutions dealing with oil-for-food or WMD against S. Hussein's Iraq.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Humanitarian aid flotilla attacked....