[Spliffdaddy]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...ast/index.html

[Sod Off Sadr]

Standing by for attempted justification from lil'militantkitten or Logic...

[placebo1969]

This thread has been here a while, but not many responses. But I'm sure in due time, it will descend to accusations and finger pointing.

[Zimphire]

[Spliffdaddy]

*crickets chirp*

[Logic]

I apologise for actually having a life at the moment but here is what you guys would say if it were the other way around(if it would even make the news):

Why are they putting a kindergarten next to a war-zone?

They didn't fire at the kindergarten, the missile hit near it like it says in the article. Nothing proves that they aimed for it.

Got any proof from a respected source and not the neo-con CNN?

They were aiming for the Israeli soldier sitting in the checkpoint next to the kindergarten so it's Israels fault because they put the soldier there.

am I forgetting anything?


oh, yeah


these are future terrorists that need to be dealt with, better to kill them today than to wait until they blow themselves up and kill a bunch of people.


I think that covers it for now.

If you disagree with any of the above you have two diffent sets of standards and therefore are hypocrites.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Logic:
If you disagree with any of the above you have two diffent sets of standards and therefore are hypocrites.

Heh heh.

Once again you’re defeated by the lack of your username.

By this very statement, you just cast YOURSELF a hypocrite by yourself disagreeing with any of those arguments when used by others! You snagged yourself in your own hypocrisy net! Nice going!

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Heh heh.

Once again you’re defeated by the lack of your username.

By this very statement, you just cast YOURSELF a hypocrite by yourself disagreeing with any of those arguments when used by others! You snagged yourself in your own hypocrisy net! Nice going!

Did I say that I disagreed or agreed with the statements above?

Or were you just Projecting™?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

You’re simply unable to follow a logic argument- as usual.

If you know the initial statements aren’t true, then you can’t make the hypocrite 'double standards' argument other than by lying. If you are saying they are, and therefore using them as an argument in which to create a double standard, then you’re a hypocrite yourself unless you also believe the reverse.

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
You’re simply unable to follow a logic argument- as usual.

If you know the initial statements aren’t true, then you can’t make the hypocrite 'double standards' argument other than by lying. If you are saying they are, and therefore using them as an argument in which to create a double standard, then you’re a hypocrite yourself unless you also believe the reverse.

Let me take a wild guess.

You don't have a degree in empirical sciences do you?

[Splinter]

Originally posted by Logic:
I apologise for actually having a life at the moment but here is what you guys would say if it were the other way around(if it would even make the news):

Why are they putting a kindergarten next to a war-zone?

They didn't fire at the kindergarten, the missile hit near it like it says in the article. Nothing proves that they aimed for it.

Got any proof from a respected source and not the neo-con CNN?

They were aiming for the Israeli soldier sitting in the checkpoint next to the kindergarten so it's Israels fault because they put the soldier there.

they need soldiers there because they were firing missles in that area before the soldiers were there... we could say what were they doing starting a war in a kindergarten zone?

Originally posted by Logic:
these are future terrorists that need to be dealt with, better to kill them today than to wait until they blow themselves up and kill a bunch of people.

lol its ok spliff he thought it was a palestinian kindgarten by the looks of his post

and im sorry but none of us ever justified the deaths of ANY of the children in this conflict and up untill now niether had you. but after reading this post my man... I hope to god you are like some alien in disguise because you have just lost your humanity.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Logic:
Let me take a wild guess.

You don't have a degree in empirical sciences do you?

I often wonder if you're out of High School yet.

So are the initial statements true, or false?

[Logic]

Originally posted by Splinter:
they need soldiers there because they were firing missles in that area before the soldiers were there... we could say what were they doing starting a war in a kindergarten zone?

lol its ok spliff he thought it was a palestinian kindgarten by the looks of his post

and im sorry but none of us ever justified the deaths of ANY of the children in this conflict and up untill now niether had you. but after reading this post my man... I hope to god you are like some alien in disguise because you have just lost your humanity.

Did you miss this part of my post?

I apologise for actually having a life at the moment but here is what you guys would say if it were the other way around(if it would even make the news):

And where in my post do I say that I agree with any of those statements?

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
I often wonder if you're out of High School yet.

So are the initial statements true, or false?

You don't get it do you?

I'll spell it out for you.

That is what the pro-Zionists say every time a Palestinian child is slaughtered by Israel. But when it happens to an Israeli they don't say that. That's the definition of hypocrisy and double standard.

Do you understand it now or will you continue with the personal attacks?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Logic:
But when it happens to an Israeli they don't say that.

Ah. So you're saying that IS what happened?

So then you ARE saying that the statements are true, and that's what happened.

Otherwise, how can you call a double standard based on a completely false argument? Why would someone have to believe your false statements or be guilty of a double standard?

And WHY would someone say, what even YOU are saying is false??

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Logic:
I apologise for actually having a life at the moment but here is what you guys would say if it were the other way around(if it would even make the news):

Why are they putting a kindergarten next to a war-zone?

They didn't fire at the kindergarten, the missile hit near it like it says in the article. Nothing proves that they aimed for it.

Got any proof from a respected source and not the neo-con CNN?

They were aiming for the Israeli soldier sitting in the checkpoint next to the kindergarten so it's Israels fault because they put the soldier there.

am I forgetting anything?


oh, yeah


these are future terrorists that need to be dealt with, better to kill them today than to wait until they blow themselves up and kill a bunch of people.


I think that covers it for now.

If you disagree with any of the above you have two diffent sets of standards and therefore are hypocrites.

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Ah. So you're saying that IS what happened?

So then you ARE saying that the statements are true, and that's what happened.

Otherwise, how can you call a double standard based on a completely false argument? Why would someone have to believe your false statements or be guilty of a double standard?

And WHY would someone say, what even YOU are saying is false??

So are you saying that when the pro-Zionist crowd makes those claims that they are true? If so, what's the difference between that and this?


but I have no idea why I bother trying to discuss this with you...........

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

LOL, so typical of the left.

NEVER make a case, and pat themselves on the back, while copying Spliffdaddy.

Too funny!

[Logic]

Originally posted by eklipse:

YAY!

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
LOL, so typical of the left.

NEVER make a case, and pat themselves on the back, while copying Spliffdaddy.

Too funny!

Feel better now?

[eklipse]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
LOL, so typical of the left.

NEVER make a case, and pat themselves on the back, while copying Spliffdaddy.

Too funny!

LOL, the MacNN-pro-Zionist-lobby 'made the case', Logic just threw it back in their face.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Logic:
[B]
So are you saying that when the pro-Zionist crowd makes those claims that they are true? If so, what's the difference between that and this?

It doesn't matter if their claims are true or not.

Your claim most definitely ISN'T.

Therefore, you can't say it's a 'double standard' because someone doesn't believe a lie you're telling. There's no obligation to believe your blatant lie.

You'd only have a valid point IF you were making a case based on a set of FACTS.

And I wonder why you bother trying to discuss much of anything! You're by far one of the most 'non-logical' people I've ever run across, which I just find ironic given your username.

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
It doesn't matter if their claims are true or not.

Your claim most definitely ISN'T.

Therefore, you can't say it's a 'double standard' because someone doesn't believe a lie you're telling. There's no obligation to believe your blatant lie.

You'd only have a valid point IF you were making a case based on a set of FACTS.

And I wonder why you bother trying to discuss much of anything! You're by far one of the most 'non-logical' people I've ever run across, which I just find ironic given your username.

My claims aren't true in what way?

I hope I didn't offend you by stating that it was pretty obvious that you didn't have a degree in empirical sciences. If I did, I apologise.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Logic:
My claims aren't true in what way?

So those are accurate statements of what happened?

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
So those are accurate statements of what happened?

You simply don't get it, so I won't spend my precious time trying to explain it to you again and again. Some things just aren't understood by common people.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

LOL! OF COURSE you can't give a simple yes or no!

If the answer is 'no' (which of course you know it is) then the statements aren't accurate, and certainly don't set any 'standard', double or otherwise.

And simply making a false statement doesn't make the reverse automatically false either.

Too funny! Way to display that 'logic'.

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
LOL! OF COURSE you can't give a simple yes or no!

Too funny! Way to display that 'logic'.

What can I say. Simple minds, simple pleasures.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Logic:
What can I say. Simple minds, simple pleasures.

Which sums up your presence here pretty accurately.

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Which sums up your presence here pretty accurately.

Where is Zimphire with his Projecting™ when you need him.........

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Ahh yes. If you can't copy Spliffdaddy... copy Zimphire.

Both should pat themselves on the back for such effective smackdowns that the left is forever stuck aping their material!

[Logic]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Ahh yes. If you can't copy Spliffdaddy... copy Zimphire.

Both should pat themselves on the back for such effective smackdowns that the left is forever stuck aping their material!

I'm sorry but I won't spend my time typing something original when you are repeating the same un-educated arguments as before.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Logic:
I apologise for actually having a life at the moment but here is what you guys would say if it were the other way around(if it would even make the news):

Please, you and LBK used to do the "crickets chirping" thing to us all the time.

Why are they putting a kindergarten next to a war-zone?

They didn't fire at the kindergarten, the missile hit near it like it says in the article. Nothing proves that they aimed for it.

Got any proof from a respected source and not the neo-con CNN?

Neo-con CNN??! AHHAHAHAHAAH

They were aiming for the Israeli soldier sitting in the checkpoint next to the kindergarten so it's Israels fault because they put the soldier there.

am I forgetting anything?

oh, yeah

these are future terrorists that need to be dealt with, better to kill them today than to wait until they blow themselves up and kill a bunch of people.

I think that covers it for now.

If you disagree with any of the above you have two diffent sets of standards and therefore are hypocrites.

Nope, your sense of comarison is off. That's all.

There is no angst from you and LBK, no crocodile tears.

I doubt these kids were throwing rocks at anyone.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
LOL, the MacNN-pro-Zionist-lobby 'made the case', Logic just threw it back in their face.

Naw, he stumbled over himself. It was actually pretty embarrassing to "watch" .

[BoomStick]

One day Sharon will stop being so restrained with the palestinean's shennanigans and clean house.

Wither the palestineans want peace or they want a thorough whoopin.

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
One day Sharon will stop being so restrained with the palestinean's shennanigans and clean house.

Wither the palestineans want peace or they want a thorough whoopin.

Like the university of Glasgow proved in its study about the media-coverage of the Palestine-Israel-conflict, the Israel-side is always favoured in most western media. The conflict is being portrayed as an Israel that is just reacting to militant palestinians' attacks on Israel.

This latest reporting is another perfect example for that: Forgotten are all the assassinations committed by the israelic army with its colletaral damages, forgotten are also all the military operations preceding this day, forgotten are also the massacre on demonstrating palestinians(children as well as adults), forgotten also are the 300 destroyed palestinian homes, forgotten are the stealing of palestinian lands and homes, the expropriations and the opressive occupation and massemprisonments as well as the installing of a colloboration-network with the help of torturing.

Oh, my God, a crude, homemade unguided rocket is fired on Israel by Hamas as retaliation for all the things mentioned above, that's surely a crime comparable with Hitler's genocide on the jews!

Oh, Sharon, the ex-leader of the notorious Unit 101, who commited himself more massacres than all Hamas-members together, restrained himself, is a man of peace only working to make life easier on the palestinians, but oh those bloodthirsty palestinians just don't want to give up their revenge-thoughts, how criminal.

Taliesin

[BoomStick]

So what was the murders if the Israelis in the 1972 Munich olympics in retaliation for?

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
So what was the murders of the Israelis in the 1972 Munich olympics in retaliation for?

The conflict between the palestinians and the israelis has not started with the intifada in 1987, but in 1948, the year of the foundation of Israel.

What the exact(!) justification was back then I don't remember, it's a long time ago, but I'm pretty sure there was enough justification to retaliate. Back then the retaliation-success only allowed to revenge 1 out of 10 or less killed civilians among the palestinians, while since Hamas has introduced suicide-bombing, the retaliation allows to revenge for 1 out of 5 killed civilians among the palestinians.

That means Israel is nowadays killing five times as many civilians among the palestinians than the palestinians kill among the israelis, while in former times the ratio was 1 to 10, and before 67 the ratio was 1 to 100 or worse.

The more the palestinians were successful in changing the ratio by retaliating, the total amount of killed civilians, espescially among the palestinians was reduced considerably, since the israelic army had to calculate the guaranteed retaliation, which put a restraint upon the israelic army, at least to a certain extent.

Taliesin

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by eklipse:
LOL, the MacNN-pro-Zionist-lobby 'made the case', Logic just threw it back in their face.

and it's interesting that you're about the only one who sees it that way.


Hmmm.... what COULD that mean?

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Taliesin:
The conflict between the palestinians and the israelis has not started with the intifada in 1987, but in 1948, the year of the foundation of Israel.

What the exact(!) justification was back then I don't remember, it's a long time ago, but I'm pretty sure there was enough justification to retaliate. Back then the retaliation-success only allowed to revenge 1 out of 10 or less killed civilians among the palestinians, while since Hamas has introduced suicide-bombing, the retaliation allows to revenge for 1 out of 5 killed civilians among the palestinians.

That means Israel is nowadays killing five times as many civilians among the palestinians than the palestinians kill among the israelis, while in former times the ratio was 1 to 10, and before 67 the ratio was 1 to 100 or worse.

The more the palestinians were successful in changing the ratio by retaliating, the total amount of killed civilians, espescially among the palestinians was reduced considerably, since the israelic army had to calculate the guaranteed retaliation, which put a restraint upon the israelic army, at least to a certain extent.

Taliesin

Yeah, and back in `68 when Israel should have kept on going.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
and it's interesting that you're about the only one who sees it that way.


Hmmm.... what COULD that mean?

That I am more enlightened and intelligent,

[Sod Off Sadr]

Originally posted by Sod Off Sadr:
Standing by for attempted justification from lil'militantkitten or Logic...

oh man did I call it or what?
Logic came roaring in with his disgusting justifications and moral equivocations. You'd fire the rockets if you could, wouldn't you? You'd slaughter Jewish women and children if you could, all in the name of Allah or some played-out 'liberation' or 'palestinian' 'struggle,' wouldn't you? You certainly haven't condemned their murder and the unjustifiable murder of this child.

[itai195]

Glad I stayed out of this thread

Oops...

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by eklipse:
That I am more enlightened and intelligent,

Anyone who says they're enlightened, aren't. Sorry to burst your bubble there.



and Edison was intelligent too, but couldn't even tie his own shoes...

[undotwa]

Originally posted by Logic:
You don't get it do you?

I'll spell it out for you.

That is what the pro-Zionists say every time a Palestinian child is slaughtered by Israel. But when it happens to an Israeli they don't say that. That's the definition of hypocrisy and double standard.

Do you understand it now or will you continue with the personal attacks?

I think your simplifying the situation a bit.

BTW, to show my bias, I will tell you now that I have Jewish ancestry.

I sympathise with the plight of the Israelis. As well, I sympathise with the plight of the Palestinians. Most of the Jews that migrated to Israel were fairly racist people. They wished to not associate themselves with the Catholic (from Poland, South Europe), Orthodox (from Russia, Southern Slavonic States), Protestant (from Northern Europe and England) communities. Essentially, to them, one who was not Jewish, was not among 'chosen' ones and thus were often considered to be lesser humans. The Christians often did that too (anti-Catholic feeling was very strong), however after the Enlightenment, and especially after the World Wars such resentments died down quite a bit.

The Moslem world did not have an 'Enlightenment', or any modern movement of learning and real industrialisation. Hatred dwelled in the Moslem world against the ruling Sunni Moslem sect and foreigners. This hatred, although not apparent to the outside world, existed, but was suppressed. Suppressing hatred does destroy it, it fosters it. Hatred in such circumstances cultures. The Ottoman Empire was in no way a comparison to Pax Romana. Princes fought for the crown, and the political atmosphere was very unstable.

Thus it not surprising what happened after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Order broke down, and with the West's reluctance to exert dictatorial military force upon civilians when they were mandated the territories, the hatred was unleashed.

As you know, from the late 19th and 20th centuries, there had been a gradual settlement of Zionist Jews to the Palastine. Palestine was not a densely populated area, thus such a settlement was possible.The Jews initially purchased all their land using funds donated by Zionist organisations especially in Russia. The Jews had very tightly knit communities and continued to associate with only themselves. Naturally the anti-Jewish feelings which dwelled in the hearts of the indigenous Palestinians and the anti-Palestinian sentiments felt by the Jews caused rifts between the seemingly well-to-do minority Jewish communities and the Palestinians.
After World War II, Britain had a whole heap of Jews on their hand and didn't know what to do with them. The Jews couldn't go back to their homelands, as they felt betrayed (as civilian authorities would often turn the Jews into the Germans).

Britain decided (with a lot of pressure from the United States, unwisely, indeed), to move the Jews to Palestine. Obviously this resulted in catastrophic consequences for Palestine. With such a large number of new immigrants, many Palestinians were displaced. Wars and terrorism acts initiated from both sides resulted. Let us fast forward to the present day.

The Jews have become largely westernized. Racist tendencies have died down. However now, partly by their fault, and by fault of others, their existence is threatened. Do you wish for the dismantlement of the Israeli state? Do you not know it is the only stable democratic state in the Middle East? The only faint hope for Palestine in my opinion, is for massive amounts of aid to develop infrastructure in the Gaza Strip and Westbank under a government run by the UN and then let Israel gradually annex the territories once tensions would have died down. However even that would take decades to do. Just like it took decades for the modern stable state of Israel to develop. A Palestinian state would be too difficult to develop, and the territories might as well be under the authority of an existing stable government. Of course Israel should be renamed 'Palestine'.

Given the circumstances, I am surprised that Israel has come so far. Given the threat, do you think it is not surprising to develop nuclear weapons, or armed forces which are funded with an exceptionally large proportion of GDP? These reactions are natural and are not necessarily evil. However it is what you do from that point forward that determines the legitimacy of your actions.

You are very aware of the daily bombardment of terrorist acts in the form of suicide bombs. What does that do to a country's moral? While I agree the standard Israeli response is heavy handed (even criminal), but that is understandable. What was the American response to 9/11? Quite similar.

The problem is that Palestine is in so much poverty, it has become dependent on the terrorist organisations for basic needs. Hatred dwells in poverty. If the UN develops infrastructure under some form of a UN government I hope some of this hatred will go.

[undotwa]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Anyone who says they're enlightened, aren't. Sorry to burst your bubble there.



and Edison was intelligent too, but couldn't even tie his own shoes...

It is kind of like if one says they are humble, truly they cannot be humble.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by Logic:
Did you miss this part of my post?



And where in my post do I say that I agree with any of those statements?

umm im pretty confused now... I have no idea if that was your intention but saying that children any children becasue of the environment they are about to be brought up in will become terrorists is BS and I at least have had the sense never to claim that as a scape goat for when the IDF kills an innocent child... thats ridiculous. what a child will grow up to be and im sorry but no one can tell the future they can only guess and saying that "well its ok that child was murdered because I guess hell grow up to become a terrorist" that freaking not only stupid but utterly racist.

now maybe im confused about what you meant by that... when you said it, were you enacting one of us arguing for the other side or stating what you thought? sorry but it wasnt clear to me. either way its wrong.

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by undotwa:
I think your simplifying the situation a bit.

BTW, to show my bias, I will tell you now that I have Jewish ancestry.

...

The Moslem world did not have an 'Enlightenment', or any modern movement of learning and real industrialisation. Hatred dwelled in the Moslem world against the ruling Sunni Moslem sect and foreigners. This hatred, although not apparent to the outside world, existed, but was suppressed. Suppressing hatred does destroy it, it fosters it. Hatred in such circumstances cultures. The Ottoman Empire was in no way a comparison to Pax Romana. Princes fought for the crown, and the political atmosphere was very unstable.

Thus it not surprising what happened after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Order broke down, and with the West's reluctance to exert dictatorial military force upon civilians when they were mandated the territories, the hatred was unleashed.

...

Britain decided (with a lot of pressure from the United States, unwisely, indeed), to move the Jews to Palestine. Obviously this resulted in catastrophic consequences for Palestine. With such a large number of new immigrants, many Palestinians were displaced. Wars and terrorism acts initiated from both sides resulted. Let us fast forward to the present day.

The Jews have become largely westernized. Racist tendencies have died down. However now, partly by their fault, and by fault of others, their existence is threatened. Do you wish for the dismantlement of the Israeli state? Do you not know it is the only stable democratic state in the Middle East?

...


You are very aware of the daily bombardment of terrorist acts in the form of suicide bombs. What does that do to a country's moral? While I agree the standard Israeli response is heavy handed (even criminal), but that is understandable. What was the American response to 9/11? Quite similar.

The problem is that Palestine is in so much poverty, it has become dependent on the terrorist organisations for basic needs.
...

I appreciate your good-meant try to understand both sides of the conflict, and you have some good points there, but you also made without bad intention some very grave simplifications and even falsifications regarding the history of the muslim-world:

1. The muslim-world indeed had its enlightment-phase long before Europe had theirs, to be exact in the 8th and 9th-century and to a lesser extent in the following centuries, before the ottomans occupied the islamic world and put a harsh stop to the enlightment-phase. Maybe industrialisation would have occured, were it not for the occupation by the ottomans, we will never know.

2. The ottoman empire didn't just collapse itself, it was brought to collapsion by the arabic and islamic world that tried to free themselves from the occupation of the ottomans. They could do that because they found powerful allies in europe, that they could call for help, and so the Brits and French came and helped the islamic world to free themselves from the ottomans. You know what then happened...

3. Israel was founded with the help and forcing of the US like you hinted already, but you don't explain why. The US at that time were working to create a net of neo-colonies to replace the colonies of Britain and France in the arabic world. The reason for that was two-sided: a) To secure that area for the soon to be created US-empire. b) To secure the ressources for the western industries.
To achieve their goals the US financed, trained and supported military local arabic families that should play the role of local governors in the form of dictators in the neo-colonies. Their tasks were to ensure that a) the neo-colonies are/were stable, with all dictatory means that are necessary, b) that the markets stay open for western products, and c) as a result of b) to sell their ressources at bargain-prices in order to generate capital, that couldn't be generated otherwise (except by debts...), because of the open markets no domestic industries could develop, without massive subventions, etc..
Israel from its foundation on should serve as an independent military- and spybase for the US, to control their neo-colonies, to get to know what the local governors are doing, planning and thinking, to see who was still on the US-side or not, and to have a base for military intervention for the improbable coincidence that all arabic neo-colonies and their dictatorships get overthrown at once by nationalistic or islamistic movements.

4. Regarding your comments of racism among jews/israelis: The racism hasn't become any less, it has just changed from racism against all, to a racism against arabs only, even against jewish arabs, but espescially stronger against islamic arabs, and even more stronger against palestinian arabs.

5. Daily bombardment by suicide-bombers? You are aware that Israel kills nowadays five times as many civilians among the palestinians than palestinian militants can retaliate for, which is still an improvement to the 1 to 10 and 1 to 100 ratios of former times, no? A suicide-bomber is nothing more than a living and guided rocket used because the palestinians don't have reliable rockets, planes, jets, tanks or helicopters to retaliate with the same technology Israel uses.
Israel isn't responding, it hits first, then waits for the retaliation, and then responds to the retaliation, etc..

6. The palestinians are in poverty because of the oppressive occupation that robs them from their own land and homes as well as their own water-sources. To add injury to the insult, the israelic army also regularly destroys harvests as a collective punishment, and Israel even kept for years taxes that the palestinians paid...

Taliesin

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by Logic:
I apologise for actually having a life at the moment but here is what you guys would say if it were the other way around(if it would even make the news):

Why are they putting a kindergarten next to a war-zone?

They didn't fire at the kindergarten, the missile hit near it like it says in the article. Nothing proves that they aimed for it.

Got any proof from a respected source and not the neo-con CNN?

They were aiming for the Israeli soldier sitting in the checkpoint next to the kindergarten so it's Israels fault because they put the soldier there.

am I forgetting anything?


oh, yeah


these are future terrorists that need to be dealt with, better to kill them today than to wait until they blow themselves up and kill a bunch of people.


I think that covers it for now.

If you disagree with any of the above you have two diffent sets of standards and therefore are hypocrites.

So much confusion about what Logic wrote here. He is just playing devil's advocate, facing you with the standard-response radical pro-Israel-folks usually issue when palestinian civilians are hit..

Taliesin

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
and it's interesting that you're about the only one who sees it that way.


Hmmm.... what COULD that mean?

No, he's not.

There are others who a) no longer bother posting in or even reading threads relating to terror in Israel, regardless of which side, or b) read this, and gently shake their heads at Captain Oblivious, who, for all his vitriol, seems remarkably immune to sarcasm when it hits him in the face.

-s*

[Logic]

Originally posted by Taliesin:
So much confusion about what Logic wrote here. He is just playing devil's advocate, facing you with the standard-response radical pro-Israel-folks usually issue when palestinian civilians are hit..

Taliesin

THANK YOU!!!!!!

I can't understand why so few got it.............

again, thank you!