A reply

The BBQ Pit
21

milroyj you are really not doing yourself any favors by arguing this way. It comes across as very offensive and quite ignorant. If you don’t agree with debating the issue at hand - well right now the issue at hand is you, but I mean the previous issue – stay out of the debate.

I might also give you the friendly advice to not lash out with dogmatic statements that do not make any sense, they make you look rabid and uninformed. This feeds your opposition an easy and really cheep way of attacking you. It’s a pity that you do this because far down under all the irrational poppycock and bigoted semi-truths that you post there are some valid concerns that you could choose to express better.

There is for instance a wave of anti-Semitism that has been sweeping through parts of the Arabic cultures lately, this is terrible and deserves attention. You manage to pull attention away from it by being overtly dogmatic and posting stuff that clearly makes no sense like saying that Palestinians are not trying to kill Israelis but Jews. Disregardful of the public sentiments in the Palestinian community this is obviously a fallacy, as far as I know there has been no recent increase in cases of Palestinians targeting Jews outside Israel. The fact that the majority of Israelis are Jewish is not irrelevant in this case, but not the way you phrase it.

Just clean up your arguments, you’ll get more respect. Many of us will still disagree with you, but it’ll save you the headache of ending up in the babbling extremist’s camp for the moronic and comprehension impaired together with some already infamous posters that you shouldn’t want to be equated with.

There are a few examples of extreme pro-Israel supporters on the board that express their view so that it can be respected, let them guide you as far as your rhetoric goes and put away that copy of ‘Jerry Springer’s Guide to Great Debating’.

Sparc

22

Not Palestinians exclusively, but there have been increased cases of anti-Semitic violence and persecution by Arabs over the past several months. There were incidents in Germany and France in the spring, and there have been some truly obscene anti-Jewish posters and graffiti turning up at Berkely and SFSU. Do a Google search on “SFSU” and “General Union of Palestine Students” to read about a recent incident in which GUPS harrassed and threatened Jewish students and supporters at a rally, raising such an outcry that GUPS was placed on probation for a year, and lost their funding and their student website.

Raising red herrings like “What if Israel was the home of the Baptists?” is the hallmark of dishonest debate. If my grandmother had balls, she’d be my grandfather, but she doesn’t and she isn’t. The fact is that Islamic Jihad and Hamas and Al-Aqsa are acting in an anti-Semitic manner. Even a casual look at transcriptions of broadcasts originating from Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan and other countries will verify that.

Even accounting for the enormous bias of an outlet like MEMRI, it’s hard to look at things like this, this or this, or Egyptian state television running a series based on the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” and claim that anti-Semitism isn’t a motivation.

23

I hope that it is only an oversight that I am observing, or that a point is being made that doesn’t relate to my previous post and that pld hasn’t rather unexpectedly decided to join milroyj in the club for the reading impaired.

Which was a central part in why I felt the need to point out to milroyj that his lousy debating style and simplistic statements re Palestinian orientation of violence wasn’t doing any favors to neither milroyj nor the rest of the extreme pro-Israel enclave.

I take for granted that you don’t mean to say that the Palestinians should be held accountable for all things said and done in the whole Arabic world, or?

Further, I don’t think that the point here is whether or not there is anti-Semitic sentiments amongst the Palestinians and that these might even presently be wide spread. The first question is obviously why and what can be done about it. The second question is obviously to what point the misconception that Jews are equal to Israelis is widespread amongst the anti-Semite Palestinians. I find it hard to swallow arguments that completely disregard Israeli actions in assigning blame for this.

I’ll put it another way. I can relate to the Palestinians being pretty damned pissed at Israel while I cannot relate to anti-Semitism. I can relate to Israelis being pretty damned pissed at Palestinians and some other parts of the Arab world while I cannot relate to anti-Muslimism. On the other hand I can understand that in some cases people really mean it the first way while they express it the second way. Granted that from this step from anger into bigotry and then to full out racism the step is not even a step, but just a slip of the foot.

To deny that the situation would have been similar if the same actions taken by Israel would have been taken by a group of predominantly other creed is an ugly way to debate since it raises the Israeli government to a certain untouchable level due to the wrongs done to Jews in the past. We live history, try to understand it, try to learn from the mistakes and then we move on. It’s not a bank were you have credits, debts and saving accounts. If you’re going to argue that history is like a bank then you have to be prepared to admit that Israel doesn’t have a foot to stand on as regards the Zionist claims that have been realized. That’s actually exactly why I think that Israel does have existence justification, they took the land and they held on to it. If it was right or wrong is immaterial for the present generations who are born and raised Israeli. In the process a large number of people ended up disenfranchised, their present generation needs to be granted full human rights the same way the Israelis do.

Sparc

24

You’re right, Sparc, I completely overlooked that sentence of yours regarding recent Arab anti-Semitism. I blame last night’s tequila.

Anyway, I disagree with your statement that

Middle Eastern Arabs, Muslims and Jews have a shared history that, to use Squish’s example, Baptists do not share. (Christians, sure, but not all Christians are Baptists.) And whether it’s simply rank opportunism or reflective of a genuine cultural anti-Semitism (and I’m not sure which case is worse), portions of the radical Islamic and Arab world have latched onto anti-Jewish tools from generations of history. The Protocols, the blood libel, the “pigs and apes” statements, Nazism – all of this and more has been used by these groups over the past few years to incite hatred of Jews and, by extension, of Israel. Those kinds of tools are, by and large, not available for use by groups who want to oppose Baptists or whatever other creed you want to propose.

25

Nonsense, pl.

Point-blank, yes-or-no: If Israel was not a Jewish state, would Palestinians be attacking Jews? No. If Israel were a Zoroastrian state, would Palestinians be attacking Zoroastrians? Yes.

:rolleyes: It seems that anytime the actions of a person or group who happen to be Jewish are called into question, someone has to yell, “Anti-Semitism!” That is dishonest debate.

26

So, Squish, is it your assertion, then, that the blood libel and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are, in fact, not anti-Semitic? Because I really, really want to see you defend it if that is your assertion.

27

I kind of get the feeling that a few of the last posts have been the results of slightly different ideas appearing to be in conflict because some of the same words are being used, when the issues being addressed may be somewhat different.

While anti-Jewish sentiment has arisen sporadically in the Mid-East, it does not appear to have been a persistent theme for all relations among all the people in the region. However, at the same time that the Zionist movement was bringing people into the region, there were those among the non-Jewish population who latched on to specific anti-Jewish tracts to oppose the immigrants. Both the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf were published in the region in the 1920s in Arabic translation–and have tended to stay in print.

The result of this propaganda (along with the financial support for Israel from Jews living outside the region) has been to give those who oppose Israel one more tool to whip up anger and fury–and has broadened the hatred among some people in the region to include Jews anywhere.

I suspect that the typical Arab Muslim Palestinian has no strong desire to rid New York of Jews. In the midst of expressing anger, however, he is quite likely to grab the tools at hand and cry that Hitler was only wrong in failing.

In the U.S., ethnic Palestinians and ethnic Jews are going to confront each other because they typically favor different sides in the dispute. Since there is an assumption (correct or not) that all Jews in the U.S. support Israel, Palestinian supporters are going to confront (and express hatred for) Jews (the people they see) rather than Israelis, (the nation on the far side of the Atlantic).

Judging by the reactions in the Mid-East to Bush calling for a “crusade” in late September, I suspect that if the nation of Israel had been founded by Baptists, the general antagonism would have been directed toward Christians. In that regard, the Palestinians are not seeking out Jews to hate. Nevertheless, the group who actually founded Israel was Jewish, and the conflict is being expressed in anti-Jewish terms.

28

What Tom said, as he put it far more elegantly than I seem to be able to do.

29

This excuse for murder won’t fly. After all, the Arabs began attempting to destroy Israel in 1948, long before Israel had done all these alleged bad things to the Palestinian people.

No doubt, you and Sparc can find some other excuse for the attacks in 1948 and subsequently.

To me, it looks like a simple continuation of a 50+ year effort to destroy Israel.

30

Jay-sus H. Kee-rist on horseback, december, can’t you just once read a history book? Zionist terrorist organizations began their attacks on Palestinians well before 1948.

31

Thank you Squish. Let’s see if I have the excuses straight:

The 1948 attack against Israel was justified by the pre-1948 terrorist attacks. (Of course, those attacks would have stopped, once Israel had it’s own country, so the excuse doesn’t make much sense, but let that pass.)

For the current attacks, the excuse is, “repeated refusals by multiple Israeli governments to set a timetable for independence accompanied by continued government supported incursions by Israeli settler.”

Let’s complete the chart. What’s the excuse for the various attacks in between 1948 and 2002?

[sup](Gee, you don’t suppose that some Arab attacks on Israelis might have been unjustified? :smack: Nah; impossible![/sup]

32

Hi december, who would have figured that you might show up for this little party.

I wish that I could assume that you were being sarcastic, but wise from previous exchanges I must assume that you’re probably serious.

Israel was proclaimed around that time old chap, and you know that so don’t play silly games with us. You also know that at the time the land kind of belonged to the Palestinian tribes, or was it Jordan or maybe England or one or all of the above no wait a minute it belonged to the League of Nations, that’s right - that’s more or less the nasty evil UN - who then gave it to the Zionists who created Israel! Whatever!

You can’t destroy something that doesn’t exist. They tried to oppose the creation of Israel, that’s somewhat different. It doesn’t matter if that was right or wrong or good or bad, fact is that it happened. What is important is the now and the future. Like I posited before. All the people that today stand to suffer from the current conflict have rights and these rights have to be met, no matter what happened in the past. The individuals that are crossing the lines of acceptable behavior need to be punished. No group of people, be it the Jews, the Germans, the Christian, the Swedes, the French or the Palestinians or any other group you care to take deserve to be punished collectively or held accountable as a unit for something that some of them did in the past, nor for that matter what parts of those groups do today or tomorrow.

Guilt is personal old man. Was it the the Swedes that killed 6.5 to 10 million central Europeans between 1632 and 1656, or was it a few hundred thousand rowdy mercenaries under Swedish leadership? Try the second. But that might still not absolve for instance me. I mean, one of them happened to be a young foot soldier from Saxony who later went to Sweden and spawned a few kids, who in their turn had kids and so forth for a while before I popped out as a result pretty close to three hundred years later. What should we do now? Jail me? Maybe I should make a public apology? Or perhaps this isn’t enough, maybe we should hand me over to the Bohemians so that they can dispose of me as they see fit? I know! I’m in Bavaria right now, what an opportunity to set things straight. I’ll go turn myself in to the cops this very moment. See you all in court.

In all cases I sincerely apologize to the Bohemians. Hmmm, come to think of it I used to hold claims to a Baronial fief in Bohemia by marriage. Maybe I should call my ex-wife and tell her that she needs to relinquish all claims to the title and land now that she has been defiled by association with the enemy. Sheesh! After all that work to get it back from the Commies, she’ll be mighty pissed, but you know; justice is justice.

Get real.

1948! Hell man even you can’t possibly remember that year very clearly. It’s history we can’t change that, leave it.

Sparc

33

Actually I do kind of remember the establishment of Israel, which was a very big deal to my family.

I assumed that everyone knew that Israel was formed in 1948 and that a group of Arab countries immediately attacked, in an attempt to destroy Israel at birth. I assume that everyone knows that various Arab countries have made unprovoked war on Israel on several subsequent occassions.

If one’s goal is to assign blame, then I’d agree with you, Sparc – there’s a statute of limitations. However, if the goal is to gain understanding, then history can be informative, as philosopher George Santayana pointed out.

34

Good thing you said that december, because it sounded for a while like you were using that not so distant past as a means to argue who was in the right.

Fact remains that both sides fucked up a little here and a little there and a lot all over the place in the distant, medium and immediate past and shouldn’t one hope that it’s time that both sides stop doing that.

Sparc

35

december, you are turning into a parody of yourself. You have burst into this thread, picked one statement utterly out of context, lied about what it meant, and stormed off in (self)righteous indignation.

If you are going to simply pop off without addressing the actual statements made, then I fear you can no longer be taken seriously.

[ul][li]First off, there is no justification for the terrorist attacks and I have said so on numerous occasions–including the post where you excerpted this quote.[/li][li]The statement you quoted referred to a depiction of the reality behind polls with a clear indication that such polls reflect anger, not long-term commitment. Nothing I said in that post can be construed by anyone with a grasp of English as supporting the attacks.[/li][li]You attribute to “the Arabs” intents and actions that need to be identified more particularly by the specific groups that have engaged in those events. (Otherwise, I will simply dig up some extremist Zionist and “prove” that the Israelis want to depopulate the land of all Muslims and Christians and note that “the Israelis” simply want to steal all the land.)[/li][li]The people who tried to prevent the creation of Israel in 1948 are all over the age of 65. That pretty well eliminates the recent spate of 20-year-old suicide bombers from being among that group.[/li][li]Your implication that only Israelis (or Jews) have ever been attacked coveniently ignores the battles waged and raids launched in both directions among villages for over 20 years prior to 1948. It ignores Israel’s attack on Deir Yassin and similar lesser assaults (which could be construed as the work of extremists–except that Israel treated those perpetrators in the same hero-worshipping fashion that you decry when the PA fêtes terrorists, today).[/li][li]Despite the questions about the appropriateness of large numbers of Europeans moving into an impoverished region to establish a nation that excludes the original inhabitants, I support the right of Israel to exist. [/li]The question is “How will it survive and get beyond warfare?” The answer begins “First, stop holding the entire process hostage to the ability of a few haters to disrupt it.” (And, no, I do not know how it concludes–that is up to the people of the region.)
When the objection to that proposal is that “They all want us all dead.” then I will point out that there are probably fewer who want that than will be displayed in polls, but that treating them as if they did “all” want that is a self-fulfilling prophecy.[/ul]

36

You mean there was a time when he could???

Wow, how bad must that not have been?

Sparc

37

First of all, your links came nowhere close to demonstrating that “Americans wanted all Arabs dead on Sept 12”. :rolleyes:

Second, 51.1% is still a majority. (Probably a larger majority than voted for GWB, he he.) So stating that a majority of Palestinians want to liberate historic Palestine (eliminating Israel in the process), is, if not factual, given the inerrancies of polling, at least the sentiment of a majority of Palestinians. It is not bigoted to quote the results of that poll. It’s the way things are.

Third, from your very own link, we find this gem:

Great! 68%, a rather large majority, support homicide bombings! Should we throw a parade or something?

38

i guess you missed:

since when did we need a cite for an opinion?
Hooked on Phonics. Learn it, live it, love it!

39

Would they have? In fact, did they? No, they haven’t (remember Sabra and Chantilla refugee camps?); the only difference is that Israel now enjoys authority over a disenfranchised, oppressed people crowded into refugee camps without most civil rights.

In neither the first thread nor this one have I been trying to make excuses. I’ve been trying to explain how ill-treatment of the conquered leads to hatred of the conquerer and how that precipitates desperate measures, however ill-advised and immoral those measure are.

40

Um, it happens all the time on the SDMB, especially in GD and sometimes in the Pit. Someone posts an opinion, usually with an arguement about why they believe their opinion to be true.

Others disagree, and chaos ensues :slight_smile:

You made an idiotic and inflammatory claim that “Americans wanted all Arabs dead on Sept 12”, which is obviously false. You were called on it, and in response posted some links to support your “opinion”. However, your links came nowhere close to supporting your “opinion”.

Look, in GQ, cites are obviously necessary on factual matters. In GD, where the topics include religion, politics, and world affairs, in many cases, all we are left with is people’s opinions, not facts.

Backing up your opinions is still a central part of it, though. If you don’t agree, stick to IMHO or MPSIMS.