I would like to argue something pretty important to me.

[RioDeLeo]

When will the land be returned to the natives of North America, of Africa, of Australia and New Zealand. In fact everywhere else where it was stolen.

Perhaps this time.

Are you saying l should respond to your spam as well? Although that post of yours bore no relation to the subject of this thread, it was still answered by someone else, perhaps you missed it.

[Snee]

And, you mentioned ignoring uncomfortable facts on tralala's part, well, the way I see it, you have been doing the same thing, picking and choosing the arguments you think you can respond to.

Where are your examples? Or is this just another of your swings in the dark?

Swings in the dark


Let's try this: how will you explain away the fact that it's logistically impossible for the average israeli (at an average age of 28, what your beloved google says) to have taken part in the bulk of the expansions between now and 1967? At the earliest they could have joined the armed forces or voted in what, 1995? And they can't all have participated in expansionist actions, can they, even if they had been in the army?

Also, knowing that, how can you condone taking away their homes, when it's again, logistically impossible for them, a majority of the israeli people (@28 or less), to have taken part in this grand criminal scheme you've painted out in order to justify taking away their homes? And do you have a problem with israelis, because it certainly seems like it, as you seem to say that it's all right to take away their homes, but that it was wrong to take away someone else's home?

I asked you before, and I can't say your answer made much sense, if there was an answer at all.

Oh, and let's not forgot the grand Zionist plot itself, is there any solid proof that it exists today, and if so that it's something most israelis are in on?


EDit: and yes, what about JPaul's/busyman's/my notion of this being similar to the US and the Australian taking over of aboriginal lands (for example)? If we are going to force one nation to give back land they've taken from someone else in the past, surely we should do the same everywhere?

And don't forget this:

And furthermore, palestinian terrorism, or freedom fighting if we'll go by your definition, is equally contradictory to the UN's wishes, and seeing as how PLO was/is a big player in Palestine's government and was responsible for terror attacks in the past and most likely condones and possibly has a stake in the occasional attack today, and presumably has a considerable backing from the people, the powers that be in both countries have issues with following the UN's recommendations.

[tralalala]

When I said nationalist related I meant that they weren't killing somONE because he/she hated him/her specifically, i meant these killings and suicides were taken out on a basis that the murderers hated the general nation/region (western) they came from, as in they didn't want to kill Arabs or Muslims, they wanted to kill Jews or Westeners.

It's hard to explain for me, I hope you understand....

they didn't want to kill westerners or christians. they wanted our government to stop supporting america/isreal and GTFO of their business

Well, what if they knew that one train was full of Jews, Christians, Americans and Brits, the other full of Muslims.... Which one do you think they would go for..?

[GepperRankins]

they didn't want to kill westerners or christians. they wanted our government to stop supporting america/isreal and GTFO of their business

Well, what if they knew that one train was full of Jews, Christians, Americans and Brits, the other full of Muslims.... Which one do you think they would go for..?

they'd probably go for the first.


it's not the point though. it's not about killing a particular religion or even particular people. it's about trying to convince our government to stop supporting the US or try and get them out of the arab worlds business.

[JPaul]

Perhaps this time.

Are you saying l should respond to your spam as well? Although that post of yours bore no relation to the subject of this thread, it was still answered by someone else, perhaps you missed it.

Thank you, made the point better than anyone else could. You accuse the chap of ignoring points which he cannot answer, but you are more guilty of it yourself.

I am familiar with the tactic.

[tralalala]

@Gepper:

But it is the point.. Otherwise they would go for either one of the trains..
But, as you stated yourself, getting the government to support/not support something is also, the same sort of thing - the attackers were of a religion that is spread widely in the region they wanted you out of, and who did they attack? Not Muslims. Or at least they weren't going to target Muslims, but Britons nad Jews and supporters of the war in Iraq (who are of course people who belong to counttries of the West.).

[Rat Faced]

However one of the bombs in London went off in a largly Muslim Community, and most of the bombs in Iraq hurt.. Muslims.

[GepperRankins]

@Gepper:

But it is the point.. Otherwise they would go for either one of the trains..
But, as you stated yourself, getting the government to support/not support something is also, the same sort of thing - the attackers were of a religion that is spread widely in the region they wanted you out of, and who did they attack? Not Muslims. Or at least they weren't going to target Muslims, but Britons nad Jews and supporters of the war in Iraq (who are of course people who belong to counttries of the West.).

hardly anyone over here supported the iraq war. most likely none of the victims did. the intention is to get the people and the government to realise that if they get out of the middle-east our people won't get killed in terrorist attacks.


you're kinda right in a way. the one thing that links our muslims to muslims in the middle east is, well... islam. the leaders will use this to say your brothers are being oppressed, you should fight for them.

[tralalala]

But who "creats" the bombs, and who sets them off? And in what intention?


Yup, Muslims....

[lynx]

You have admirably illustrated the point about googling for your own point of view. You seek out pages which back up your argument and contradict the opposing view. Again, no checks for accuracy, you simply want to show that the other side is biased because it offends your own point of view. That in itself can hardly be described as a balanced approach.

An admirable job of misrepresentation there Lynx, you are to be commended.

On the contrary, I was clarifying exactly what you yourself had said. If there is any misrepresentation you have uttered it yourself.

You may be surprised to find that I strongly disagree with the tripe that tralalala is putting forward. Unfortunately your method of argument is equally odious, it brings no merit to you or your point of view, and as such it damages the whole argument of those who see the events in the occupied territories as atrocities.