Complaint about Israel thread
 

OP is an absolute disgrace. The fact that a) thread hasn't been deleted b) OP's blatant racism and ignorance not met with all-round disdain speaks wanders for the morality and stupidity of the 'politics' crowd.

Title edited, split from main thread.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
OP is an absolute disgrace. The fact that a) thread hasn't been deleted b) OP's blatant racism and ignorance not met with all-round disdain speaks wanders for the morality and stupidity of the 'politics' crowd.

[/ QUOTE ]


Typical PC BS attempting to silence unpopular views. Felix has made it clear he isn't talking about all Moslems here, but only a subset of same, and how Israel should deal with them. And he's focusing that on their *actions* which aren't an inherent part of racial identity. Get a [censored] grip.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP is an absolute disgrace. The fact that a) thread hasn't been deleted b) OP's blatant racism and ignorance not met with all-round disdain speaks wanders for the morality and stupidity of the 'politics' crowd.

[/ QUOTE ]


Typical PC BS attempting to silence unpopular views. Felix has made it clear he isn't talking about all Moslems here, but only a subset of same, and how Israel should deal with them. And he's focusing that on their *actions* which aren't an inherent part of racial identity. Get a [censored] grip.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? If he was criticizing Muslims (specifically extremist Muslims) and calling for the abolition of Islam I would by no means oppose him. Note your ignorance in claiming that all Arabs are Muslims or at least failing to see a distinction. I think of all insults, assuming that ALL Arabs subscribe to the abhorrent religion of Islam, is the most vicious and vile.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP is an absolute disgrace. The fact that a) thread hasn't been deleted b) OP's blatant racism and ignorance not met with all-round disdain speaks wanders for the morality and stupidity of the 'politics' crowd.

[/ QUOTE ]


Typical PC BS attempting to silence unpopular views. Felix has made it clear he isn't talking about all Moslems here, but only a subset of same, and how Israel should deal with them. And he's focusing that on their *actions* which aren't an inherent part of racial identity. Get a [censored] grip.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? If he was criticizing Muslims (specifically extremist Muslims) and calling for the abolition of Islam I would by no means oppose him. Note your ignorance in claiming that all Arabs are Muslims or at least failing to see a distinction. I think of all insults, assuming that ALL Arabs subscribe to the abhorrent religion of Islam, is the most vicious and vile.

[/ QUOTE ]


Wait. So your objection is that he has made denigrating comments about Arab culture? Culture is a set of communally recognized and approved *actions*, and again isn't an inherent racial quality.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

Why is this a new thread? I really don't want to draw paticular attention to my complaint and it also looks as if I started the thread.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

Its a new thread because I don't like it when threads are hijacked by arguments about moderation. I edited your OP to note that you did not start this thread.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

Original thread in question for posterity: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why is this a new thread? I really don't want to draw paticular attention to my complaint and it also looks as if I started the thread.

[/ QUOTE ]


Why wouldn't you want to draw attention to it? You made a complaint about the modding in a thread when you had the alternative of sending iron a PM. Either way is valid but you chose the open way.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP is an absolute disgrace. The fact that a) thread hasn't been deleted b) OP's blatant racism and ignorance not met with all-round disdain speaks wanders for the morality and stupidity of the 'politics' crowd.

[/ QUOTE ]


Typical PC BS attempting to silence unpopular views. Felix has made it clear he isn't talking about all Moslems here, but only a subset of same, and how Israel should deal with them. And he's focusing that on their *actions* which aren't an inherent part of racial identity. Get a [censored] grip.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? If he was criticizing Muslims (specifically extremist Muslims) and calling for the abolition of Islam I would by no means oppose him. Note your ignorance in claiming that all Arabs are Muslims or at least failing to see a distinction. I think of all insults, assuming that ALL Arabs subscribe to the abhorrent religion of Islam, is the most vicious and vile.

[/ QUOTE ]


Wait. So your objection is that he has made denigrating comments about Arab culture? Culture is a set of communally recognized and approved *actions*, and again isn't an inherent racial quality.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I just think if you want to avoid coming across as a vile racist genocidal extremist maniac you should make doubly sure that you elaborate more on your stance if it at least clumsily comes across as calling for the apocalypse against the Arab people and a complete disregard for humanity and truth .

And yes; arguments against the culture of Arabs in [i] that [i/] context (promoting the bombing of Arabs supposedly on political grounds) has very strong racial undertones to say the least and of course dispels the claim that is indeed based soley on political grounds.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why is this a new thread? I really don't want to draw paticular attention to my complaint and it also looks as if I started the thread.

[/ QUOTE ]


Why wouldn't you want to draw attention to it? You made a complaint about the modding in a thread when you had the alternative of sending iron a PM. Either way is valid but you chose the open way.

[/ QUOTE ]

In honesty I don't think the thread should have been locked/deleted. I don't really think anything should be locked including the most vile of positions, unless it is construde as spam. However, when there is heavy modding on certain issues such as Islam, anti-semitism etc. I think there has to be a balance where the content of Felix post is at least highly considered to be of ill-taste and beyond soley political intentions against a race of people.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

Since you acknowledge that culture is a collection of actions and not an inherent racial quality, why does the context in which that culture is discussed/critcized matter? I.E. what does it matter what some action a person would advocate if an analysis is true?

And don't you think you have some obligation to avoid hyperbole by basically insinuating that advocating an attack on a certain group of people *on the basis of their actions rather than their race* is in fact the same as a racial attack?

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

meh, OP first calls for a war against the arabs, then later in THAT context is critical of their culture which he regards as inferior. This is a standard racist position that should be considered as being a fringe extremist view as it poses a clear distinction with the more acceptable view that Isreal may legitimately use force against the Arab states in regards to a political position. Otherwise the word fascism rings a bell.

anyway, its 10am and I havnt slept yet and have work today so goodnight perhaps I'm overly groggy.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

zaster,

The actual important point in context is the actions of those Arabs which is what Felix is using as a justification for certain actions against them, i.e. their extremist/terrorist actions. If you remove such actions, i.e. the Palestinians were not backing and participating in terrorism, and instead were peaceably going about their business, *then* you might have a valid argument of racism if he still sought to justify an attack on them solely in view of their culture.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

Felix started his original post with :

1.The Arab leaders don't want peace.
2.The Arabs are lying sacks of crap.

In point 1, he is referring to Arab leaders. In point 2, he says "Arabs." I read this as all Arabs.

Later in the post he calls for the ethnic cleansing of Israel:

"Take away the citizenship of all Arabs inside Israel."

"Relocate all Arabs inside Israel and dump them . . ."

The post is indeed a disgrace to 2+2.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

i think you are whining about "racism" because its pretty damn hard to defend the actions of the arab states/palestinians in the last 20 years

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

andy,

Notice that you are implicitly articulating a principle here which is that the morally superior victor in a war (if one is) cannot as a price/punishment/result of winning such a war, force the vanquished to leave a certain territory that has been captured. Such a forced depopulation is not "ethnic cleansing" since that implies killing them (genocide). So I think you have to justify that principle.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
In point 1, he is referring to Arab leaders. In point 2, he says "Arabs." I read this as all Arabs.


[/ QUOTE ]

seems like a reasonable person would apply it to the leaders.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Felix started his original post with :

1.The Arab leaders don't want peace.
2.The Arabs are lying sacks of crap.

In point 1, he is referring to Arab leaders. In point 2, he says "Arabs." I read this as all Arabs.

[/ QUOTE ]


Responding to this separately I would say he means those Arab leaders who have lied, and any Arabs who support/assert such lies. If that happens to be a majority of Arabs, then that's just an unpleasant reality to those who think that an entire culture/population/country can't be wrong in some particulars.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
andy,

Notice that you are implicitly articulating a principle here which is that the morally superior victor in a war (if one is) cannot as a price/punishment/result of winning such a war, force the vanquished to leave a certain territory that has been captured. Such a forced depopulation is not "ethnic cleansing" since that implies killing them (genocide). So I think you have to justify that principle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ethnic cleansing is EXACTLY what Felix was advocating. I think you just don't understand what the term means, as it is much broader than genocide.

I don't think andy really needs to justify his opposition to ethnic cleansing either, as mass deportation is a textbook example of crimes against humanity.

And andy is of course right that Felix's post is thoroughly shameful and appalling.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
The post is indeed a disgrace to 2+2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

I just want to add that if some here think that because of the potentially inflammatory nature of attacking the beliefs and actions of a particular group of people who happen to belong to the same race or culture, that a poster should define terms better, then I'm OK with that as long as we can have a predefined such list for the sake of brevity.

For example, if I or Felix say "Arabs", we are referring to any and all Arabs who either a) commit terrorist actions, b) support and/or aid such perpetrators, c) sit idly by while there fellows do such.

Now personally that is why I use the term "extremist moslems" and others use "islamofascists". So if you want to say such clearer but still concise terms should be used instead of generic terms like "Arabs", I am OK with that *as long as* YOU don't get to define for ME the conditions of asserting someone is a member of such a class.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
andy,

Notice that you are implicitly articulating a principle here which is that the morally superior victor in a war (if one is) cannot as a price/punishment/result of winning such a war, force the vanquished to leave a certain territory that has been captured. Such a forced depopulation is not "ethnic cleansing" since that implies killing them (genocide). So I think you have to justify that principle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ethnic cleansing is EXACTLY what Felix was advocating. I think you just don't understand what the term means, as it is much broader than genocide.

I don't think andy really needs to justify his opposition to ethnic cleansing either, as mass deportation is a textbook example of crimes against humanity.

And andy is of course right that Felix's post is thoroughly shameful and appalling.

[/ QUOTE ]


It is nonetheless obvious that "ethnic cleansing" has the connotation of genocide. And precisely because of its emotionally charged nature it shouldn't be casually used when referring to "mass deportation" when such doesn't involve killing or virtual killing (deportation to a desert without supplies e.g.).

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]


It is nonetheless obvious that "ethnic cleansing" has the connotation of genocide. And precisely because of its emotionally charged nature it shouldn't be casually used when referring to "mass deportation" when such doesn't involve killing or virtual killing (deportation to a desert without supplies e.g.).

[/ QUOTE ]

The mind boggles. Ethnic cleansing has the connotation of genocide because the people who do it are almost (100%?) invariably racist monsters who don't give a [censored] about the lives of the people they are deporting, and thus end up committing genocide or something close to it.

Even more mind-boggling is the fact that ethnic cleansing is itself a sanitized code word for crimes against humanity or genocide, as the case may be. And now that people have caught on and understand what's really being said, you want to substitute ANOTHER euphemism, "mass deportation."

And then, in a masterstroke of boggling, you complain that people are "casually" using the 100% accurate term "ethnic cleansing" when Felix was talking about the "mere" mass deportation of Israeli Arab citizens. "It's not like we're going to kill them, just render them stateless, take them away from their ancestral homes, and dump them somewhere where they'll maybe find a new life. Oh, yeah, and the IDF will be conducting occasional punitive raids against their new homes."

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Even more mind-boggling is the fact that ethnic cleansing is itself a sanitized code word for crimes against humanity

[/ QUOTE ]


You are predefining mass exportation which doesn't involve killing as a crime against humanity. The fact that treaties call it so doesn't make it so. And you ignore the issue of whether those inhabitants can lose their rights to live in a certain area by virtue of being the defeated aggressor in a war.

This is the same old [censored] we always see where Israel is not permitted by the Arab terrorist apologists to impose permanent punishments/sanctions on them and where instead you assert it must go back to the status quo. Sweet deal isn't it? You try to rob a bank and get released and get to try again the next day. Obviously this is taking it to a logical extreme, but it illustrates the principle.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

I'm not whining, I'm pointing out that that post was a disgrace because the poster advocated ethnic cleansing and called Arabs lying scumbags.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

So if I posted "Jews are lying sacks of crap," and suggesteed they be "dumped" somewhere, we could write that off to just some "unpleasant reality" because I could list dozens of them that Israeli leaders have made over the years? I could also list hundreds of lies that our leaders have made; would it be OK for me to post "Americans are lying sacks of crap"?

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

He said Arabs are lying sacks of crap. Then he said that Israel should be ethnically cleansed of them.

2+2=4.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

From Wikipedia:

Ethnic cleansing refers to various policies or practices aimed at the displacement of an ethnic group from a particular territory in order to create a supposedly ethnically "pure" society. At one end it is virtually indistinguishable from forced emigration and population exchange while at the other it merges with deportation and genocide. At the most general level, however, ethnic cleansing can be understood as the expulsion of an "undesirable" population from a given territory due to religious or ethnic discrimination, political, strategic or ideological considerations, or a combination of these.

I'm not implicitly articulating anything here. I'm saying the post in question was a disgrace because it called Arabs lying sacks of crap and because it advocates the transfer (or, as he put it, the "dumping" of the native Palestinians who still reside in Israel.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

Not when later on in the same post he advocates the "dumping" of all the Arabs in Israel.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
So if I posted "Jews are lying sacks of crap," and suggesteed they be "dumped" somewhere, we could write that off to just some "unpleasant reality" because I could list dozens of them that Israeli leaders have made over the years? I could also list hundreds of lies that our leaders have made; would it be OK for me to post "Americans are lying sacks of crap"?

[/ QUOTE ]


andy,

Let's note there are two separate and totally distinct issues here: 1) whether it is OK to make such a statement in some/any situations, and 2) how you might use such an assertion. #1 does NOT depend on #2 *unless* one is making a demonstrably false assertion that is far from the actual truth (yelling fire when there is no fire).

So regarding #1, the question is simply is it true? And since most assertions can vary in scope, the truth test has to be applied to that scope. So to use your hypo let's see the subcases:

a) all americans are lying POS
b) most americans are lying POS
c) some americans, but still a significant percentage, are lying POS
d) a very few or no americans are lying POS.

So there is a scale here and it is upon he who makes a specific assertion to provide reasonable proof/evidence of same, even if everyone wouldn't agree about the weight of such evidence and thus which of the possible conclusions above are true.

Now if someone makes an assertion that is both demonstrably false, and also needlessly inflammatory in the specific context being discussed, then that poster has done wrong. How wrong depends on how far away the assertion is from the actual truth, as in asserting a) above when d) is the truth, and how inflammatory an assertion is *if* it is false or possibly needless in the context.

To illustrate further, you can read this post in an old ATF thread on this forum and the assertion I asked iron about. I would say as I did there that I can prove that assertion. However it is certainly inflammatory regarding Islam. So the question then is do I need to make such an assertion in a specific context as with the thread we are discussing here and moslem/arab extremists in general. The answer I would say is no. However if we were discussing the truth/falsity of the Islamic religion, then I would say yes it is right to make that assertion despite its inflammatory nature.


So the standard I have articulated here is:

1) Is an assertion true?
2) If a true assertion is inflammatory is it necessary to make it in the context of the current debate?

If an assertion is both demonstrably false and far from the truth (i.e. 2 when the truth is 10 and not 8 when it is 10), *and* the assertion is also inflammatory, then a thread or poster should be moderated. Same also if it is both true and *needlessly* inflammatory.


Now notice how I haven't discussed the use to which an assertion which is both true and inflammatory might be put. That's because such a use has to be judged on its own merits and again such uses to which unreasonable persons might make of an inflammatory truth has NO bearing on whether such a truth should be spoken.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
From Wikipedia:

Ethnic cleansing refers to various policies or practices aimed at the displacement of an ethnic group from a particular territory in order to create a supposedly ethnically "pure" society. At one end it is virtually indistinguishable from forced emigration and population exchange while at the other it merges with deportation and genocide. At the most general level, however, ethnic cleansing can be understood as the expulsion of an "undesirable" population from a given territory due to religious or ethnic discrimination, political, strategic or ideological considerations, or a combination of these.

I'm not implicitly articulating anything here. I'm saying the post in question was a disgrace because it called Arabs lying sacks of crap and because it advocates the transfer (or, as he put it, the "dumping" of the native Palestinians who still reside in Israel.

[/ QUOTE ]


That's the denotation. However it has a much wider connotation which is why I objected to the term "ethnic cleansing" being made equivalent to the action of forced removal that doesn't involve/forsee killing.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

Arabs (not Palestinians) make up more than a fifth of Israeli citizens.

Good idea to rip out 1.3 million of your citizens and dump them over the border.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Israelis are Lying Sacks of Crap


Does this qualify as "otherwise objectionable"?

"While using 2+2 website, you may not post or transmit any unlawful, threatening, abusive, libellous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, profane, or otherwise objectionable information of any kind"


[/ QUOTE ] If you can both a) prove it, and b) demonstrate you needed to make such an inflammatory statement in a given context, then why should it be objectionable to a rational person and violate the T&C?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is all very charming but still extremely smelly.

Andyfox is of course being the adult here but I doubt if his adult approach will find many supporters.

It's really very simple - and we can use your own pseudo-logic to demonstrate : Suppose poster A puts up a post that for the very first time, ever, in the history of 2+2 alleges that Italians are "lying sacks of crap". According to your logic he would have to prove it! Guess what, I agree. The poster should have to prove it. Trying to prove that would lead to the meat of poster A's proclamation (and most likely show that he was wrong).

Now, if poster A by some miracle demonstrates that indeed "Italians are lying sacks of craps", such a statement can be posted on 2+2 without any problem. But what if poster A cannot prove it? Would this mean that nobody, ever again, under any circumstances, could claim on 2+2 that "Italians are lying sacks of craps"??

But this would be not just a dishonest rule, it would also be wrong! For the simple reason, that logic and arguments never stay stale; they advance, change or augment. What if poster A used arguments a, b and c and was defeated on them -- but now I present argument d? Is this new argument never allowed to see the light of day on 2+2? (You can see the absurdity of such logic, if we were to follow this about poker. The ranks of hands, for example, would have been set in stone years ago!)

Therefore, as andyfox succinctly demonstrate through the example he gave, the rule should be interpreted as either (a) no inflammatory statements whatsoever about any nation, person, group, etc, in which case Felix Nietsche is due for a ban, --or-- (b) hey, you folks can argue whatever the hell you like, as long as the mods keep it civil and not repetitious.

Goes without saying that I vote (b). You, on the other hand, essentially vote for a variant which goes "No inflammatory statements, etc, about Jews and Israelis", implying that it has been established that Jews and Israelis are NOT lying sacks of crap (I happen to agree with this, but that's not the point) AND that it has also been established that Islamists/Arabs/Palestinians are lying sacks of crap and therefore anyone can freely post this "truth". Ergo, according to your logic, one can insult FOR EVER Arabs and Muslims, while one can NEVER insult Jews and Israel.

2+2... A place full of magic mirrors.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

mrick,

You mischaracterized what I said for I didn't state that having proven something was true or false, that it was for all time true or false regardless of changing conditions. This *should* be obvious since I am focusing on truth/falsity and actions, instead of on inherent qualities of race.

The standard of truth/falsity is judged at the instant an assertion is made and is applied to the scope of an assertion. I.E., saying X is a lying piece of crap without limitations implies that X has always and is still lying. Obviously there are other alternatives such as lying now, has lied for the past X years or about such and such a position.

You used a lot of words to say not much and not prove anything.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

I must say that whomever chose the title for this thread did a poor job. I thought, until I saw Andy's locked post, that this thread was about someone's complaint about Israel.


Now having read this thread, I thank zaster for speaking up and andy for being the conscience of this board. They are entirely right.

And I thank iron for making this a separate thread (even if he chose the bad title), so that I could delight in the delicious irony of seeing BluffTHIS! say to someone else "You used a lot of words to say not much and not prove anything".

Excellent!

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

I'm persuaded that the "piece of crap" comment is inappropriate. However, I don't see the point in deleting an OP that has been up for 3 days. Please hit notify mod on any similar that is more recent and I'll clean the thread up in the morning.

However, advocacy of war, and yes war crimes like ethnic cleansing, is a legitimate political position. I won't moderate that.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm persuaded that the "piece of crap" comment is inappropriate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I trust you are only persuaded as to the unlimited scope of the statement in absence of proof of the unlimited broadest scope, is that correct? I.E., if he either demonstrated reasonable proof of such a broad statement (even if all or most don't agree), or if he limited the scope, then you would be OK with it wouldn't you?

To be clear, I don't think he has proven the broadest scope of that comment, but believe he could prove a narrower scope (like "the majority of Palestinians who support Fatah and Hamas).

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
You mischaracterized what I said for I didn't state that having proven something was true or false, that it was for all time true or false regardless of changing conditions.

[/ QUOTE ] I merely extended your "logic" to its natural conclusion.

[ QUOTE ]
I am focusing on truth/falsity and actions, instead of on inherent qualities of race.

The standard of truth/falsity is judged at the instant an assertion is made and is applied to the scope of an assertion. I.E., saying X is a lying piece of crap without limitations implies that X has always and is still lying.

[/ QUOTE ] Of course you can argue that X is a LPOC now, e.g. "The Arabs, in the context of the Israel/Arab conflict, are LPOC". That would be a valid argument IMO -- which would need to be justified of course, in the course of a dicsussion. We seem to agree that making a claim about the attributes of a group of people, any kind of people, needs to be justified -- otherwise the claimant is by default a bigot.

But the issue is different than this and very, very clear. And I'll make it clearer!

Seems like Felix Nietche is free to claim that "Arabs are LPOC" (now, forever, or "in the context, etc" doesn't matter). Is Andyfox or me or anyone else free to claim that "Israelis are LPOC" ? And since the mods have ruled that proposals for war and ethnic cleansing can be advocated and discussed on this forum, am I allowed to propose that all Israelis should be deported from "Palestine" and that every Israeli --man,woman, or child-- who refuses to leave should be EXTERMINATED ??


Note that Andyfox was somewhat more discreet than Felix. Andyfox wrote about "Israelis"; while the proper counter-example to Felix's "Arabs" is of course "Jews"...

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You mischaracterized what I said for I didn't state that having proven something was true or false, that it was for all time true or false regardless of changing conditions.

[/ QUOTE ] I merely extended your "logic" to its natural conclusion.

[/ QUOTE ]


Cyrus,

I am only going to address this part of your post in order to show everyone what a lying intentionally distorting piece of [censored] you are.

You have deliberately used a logical fallacy here. When I say the weather condition is "cloudy", by your "logic", I am saying the weather has always been and will always be cloudy. Thus you have intentionally ignored the time limitation in order to misportray what I said.

Regardless of whether the IP address of your mrick account matches that of proven former Cyrus accounts, you are the same and if iron doesn't acknowledge that and ban your ass he is being willfully blind. GTFO.

Re: Another Stupid Peace Initiative for Israel/Arabs
 

[ QUOTE ]


I am only going to address this part of your post in order to show everyone what a lying intentionally distorting piece of [censored] you are.

You have deliberately used a logical fallacy here. When I say the weather condition is "cloudy", by your "logic", I am saying the weather has always been and will always be cloudy. Thus you have intentionally ignored the time limitation in order to misportray what I said.

[/ QUOTE ] No, I specifically accepted that it's OK to claim that "X is LPOC" now or for any period in history. The question remains if you can say this about any X or only about Arabs as Felix did.

The rest of your incoherence about "Cyrus" should I care about? Because I dont know what youre talking about.