>>Yes, you are. Saying that I cannot criticize the PA's censorship because some things are supposedly 'suppressed' here (though I don't know what you're talking about and I wonder if you do) is a false equivalence, which is a form of moral relativism. Using the U.S's supposed 'sins' to prevent me criticizing the Palestinians celebrations of last week's terrorist attacks is moral relativism.<<
nadine, please point out where i said this. you said i said it. your integrity is on the line.
>>Agreed.<<
whew. i'm glad you saw the light on that one. don't gloss over it, though. root out the irrational tendency to extrapolate from the individual to the group. each person should be allowed the dignity to represent themselves and not be labeled based on skin color, background, or type of hat they wear. it is just plain ignorant and lots of folks have been harmed by this attitude.
>>However, you have continually made excuses for the Palestinians hating the Jews and approving, by a large majority, of the use of suicide bombers against Israeli civilians, due to their 'natural feelings'.<<
no, i didn't. what i have done is counter the misleading inuendo that arabs are somehow fundamentally bad people who, for absolutely no reason under the sun, have decided to pick on the israel. there is a reasonable source for their anger. i have also said many times that they need to GET OVER IT and worry about getting ahead and not even. however, not everyone has eyes to see the type. i guess this kind of statement is outside their little mental box that they use to label me so something short circuits.
>>I was just pointing out that in your book sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander, apparently. In my book, nobody gets a free license for terror. Is it any wonder that people who approve the Sbarro pizzaria bombing also approve the WTC bombing? What's the difference, besides scale?<<
nadine, you should be ashamed of yourself. misstating my clear positions and then saying i'm for or support terrorism in any way shape or form is pure crap. it is clearly contrary to my consistent stance. if truth isn't on your side, make it up and throw it. agree with me or disagree with me, fine. make up stuff and mislead? very poor.
wrt to the israel nation sprouting up out of nowhere, all i can say is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." if the roles were reversed, israel would not want the arabs to do to them what israel did to the arabs in the land, imho. i consider it stealing - taking what wasn't theirs to take, no matter what "arguments" they use to "legitimize" it (i also noted the US has done its share of stealing, too, so the jewish extremists can't legitimately claim i'm just attacking them b/c i'm anti - jew - they still will, but their folly is self evident to a rational person).
i have no doubt that if the roles were reversed that israel would consider it stealing. perhaps i'm wrong, though i don't think so. i agree the definition and the concept is simple. perhaps that isn't the right view for some other folks. perhaps, taking land away from subhuman evil barbarians that don't deserve squat and didn't really have a nation anyway is how others view (justify?) it.
wrt to palestinians, yes, selfish people on both sides have taken advantage of them for selfish reasons. i think the history of this is self evident. they s/b mad at the arab countries, too. i'm sure some are...
>>The Palestinians are in pretty f---ed up circumstances, alright, and they were put there by their Arab brothers and their own pathetic excuse for leadership.<<
good thing israel was there to lend a helping hand to the palestinians and take land that some used to call home and not allow them back. but, of course, that is just a minor issue, right?
>>Though Israel must assume responsibility for its behavior in the territories since 1967, the intransigence of the Arab countries and the terrorism of the PLO must also be considered. The Palestinians can't get over anything while they are ruled by corrupt thugs who have dragged them into a idiotic terrorist war, when they might have had a legitimate state.<<
i've already stated that i understand why israel has expanded their borders (for protection). i would, too, in their shoes. i would not start building houses in the buffer zone, though. that would lead a reasonable person to believe it wasn't really a buffer zone.
in any case, the whole area is screwed up, imho. so much hate, anger and extremism on ALL sides - if you don't hate [fill in the blank] then you are anti [fill in the blank]. my way or the highway on both sides. there is not a right side and wrong side, there are two or three sides hashing it out for what they believe is their own self interest. let's call it what it is. or, let's keep focusing on the smell of their crap without acknowledging our crap stinks, too.
in the end, the US should focus on ending the terrorist threat w/o pandering to the self interest of one side or the other to foster US hate for folks who didn't have anything to do with this bombing in this country - even if they hate us and appear ignorant to the 3rd power.
i think we are on the right course. |
