::falls down laughing again::
This is such a perfect encapsulation of the FinnAgain Filter in action. People are giving you shit because you’re pointing out the facts! They don’t like you because you’re just too real for them! You tell it like it is!
Because, you see, people are routinely jumped on here for being too factual in their arguments. Yep, that’s definitely the problem. You’re just too factual for everybody.
Rather obviously yes, people are giving me shit because I’m pointing out the facts (several, including yourself, have admitted in fact that you don’t care at all about the facts and you’re merely giving me shit because I’m pointing them out.)
If I wasn’t pointing out that bigotry is bigotry or dishonesty is dishonesty, people like you wouldn’t be spazzing out. That seems fairly elementary.
And no, you and a few assholes are not “everybody”, despite your delusions of multiplicity. You just spazz out when certain facts are mentioned, like that many of the arguments we’ve seen have been based on dishonesty and bigotry. You flail about aimlessly when that’s pointed out, because, well, that’s your damage. God only knows why you and others can’t bring themselves to condemn bigotry and dishonesty, but gets their panties in a good ol’ bunch if it gets pointed out.
Good use of the bandwagon fallacy though, add flavor.
Oh FFS… it’s getting a lot of controversy in Israel because there are lots of divergent opinions. Of course you’re assuming that, gee, maybe that’s proof that Israel is bad and racist and blah blah. You’re still not getting it. Malthus is treating you with kid gloves and that evidently has no effect either. You’ve admitted that you have a natural anti-Israel bias that you habitually stick new facts into and have to work against. He pointed out to you that you’re merely assuming the worst about Israel and then constructing hypotheticals to justify that. Now you’re doing the same thing, again.
And one of the reasons it’s receiving opposition is because the law itself is pretty damn silly and this is probably an unintended consequence of how it’s written. And yet again a valid debate on the actual issues is obscured because so much time has to be spent simply fact checking. if we could’ve done away with the “ZOMG, Jim Crow Apartheid!!!” and “Palestinian jailed for being Palestinian and the woman thought that merely sleeping with an Arab made her dirty!” nonsense, folks could’ve actually raised sane objections to the law.
There isn’t enough details in the various news accounts to know. Given that the fellow pled guilty, there would not be much of a court transcript to go on - if you plead guilty, the fact of your guilt tends to be assumed.
There is no reason to assume that the account of a guy who plead guilty of deception is 100% truthful as to the content of that deception. If the deception involved was really no deception at all, why did he plead guilty?
For exactly the same reason. Plenty of folks in Israel are heavily critical of Israeli society (that is, in fact, one of the attractive points of that country). Those who are already critical, are going to be predisposed to viewing this matter in that light.
It is IMHO a big mistake to view lots of internal criticism of a society as proof that the society is, in fact, objectively more worthy of criticism. The most ominous societies lack internal criticism.
I’m not sure. Try asking the Norfolk 4, who all plead guilty to the same rape murder, that a fifth person later admitted he committed alone. Oh, and the police also tried to railroad three other men for the same crime.
Thank you for addressing my points. IMO the change in law by the High Court, and the subsequent ruling by Judge Segal, presents a fairly obvious slippery slope.
The first instance seems a bit easier to understand - he coerced his victims into sex by not only misrepresenting himself but also offering something (which he did not have) in exchange for sex. “Sleiman told women he would get them an apartment and increased NII payments if they would sleep with him.”
But in the second instance the Judge ruled because he lied about two things, not being Jewish and not wanting a “serious romantic relationship”, he was guilty of “rape by deception”.
So let’s leave out the Jewish angle for a moment - does this mean that any woman can claim rape if the man pretends he wants to be in a relationship but really doesn’t? What about guys who lie about their job (as the “doctor” did in the earlier case)? If that’s the case, there will be a whole hell of a lot of rapists out there to be arrested.
As I mentioned upthread, I can understand the case for “rape by deception” when there is coercion, but I cannot really grasp where the line is for simply lying. And frankly I think (and hope) this will be overturned on appeal, and that it has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. (I also hope for a pony, so there you go…)
This is true, and definitely presents another wrinkle. I can only suppose that he didn’t really understand what he was pleading to, otherwise why would he appeal later?
Frankly, for someone guilty of deception, “Dudu” doesn’t appear to be too bright.
In this case the guy is appealing the verdict - but not on the basis he didn’t lie. He’s appealing on the basis that the punishment for lying is too harsh.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/weird/2010/07/23/14807736.html
…
Why would a guy who did not in fact lie claim to feel “bad about what he did”, or make the argument that lying about being a pilot etc. shouldn’t amount to rape? Why would he be arguing that the punishment for what he did was too severe?
I agree that the law as stated is questionable. Personally, I think “rape by deception” should be limited to some very clear-cut categories, and not be ‘at large’.
You are quite correct - under the law as stated, a married man (never mind Jewish) who seeks sex based on holding out a relationship would be guilty. Ditto for the guy claiming to be a surgeon when he’s not.
From the above noted article:
:::::Yaaawn::::
Congrats Frothy, first person on my ignore list.
Fuckin’ nutbar.
Get help.
I do have to admit, it is gratifying to be called insane by one of the board’s few actual anti-Semites.
Kinda like having a Klanner tell you that you’ve just gone too far in the whole “equality” thing.
I’m obviously doing something right.
Found any more people in the US government whose names sound Jewish to you, who you’d like to accuse of potential treason? (Greek Orthodox folks can be included if you confuse them with Jews and slander them by accident)
Ah well.
Thanks, you can go back to drinking, assuming you’d taken a break.
The accounts differ depending on who you ask. He makes it sound like it was confusion on the woman’s part, she makes it sound like he explicitly said that he was an eligible Jewish bachelor (judging from the picture I saw of him, it wasn’t because he was so good looking) in an attempt to have sex with her.
So in the first sentence, I would say you are accusing “people” of antisemitism.
In the second sentence, I would say that you accuse Ionizer of anti-semitism.
If you are not accusing “people” and Ionizer of anti-semitism then what are you doing when you imply that some things seem to be acceptable as long as the targets are the “right people”?
Now this doesn’t prove that you ever leveled these sort of veiled accusations at me but…
Because this idiocy already takes up too much of my time. I made that mistake in my first “debate” with you. I ended up spending hours looking up old posts to prove my point to you until I realized how futile it was.
I remember having to correct people maybe 3 or 4 times after which people stopped bringing it up. Maybe that’s the problem. You don’t realize that sometimes repetition is necessary on these message boards because it is really easy to gloss over a post unless you are paying a LOT of attention to what everyone else says. I know that I miss stuff sometimes and when I do people remind me of the facts again. Perhaps you might remember that when you reply with posts saying “I already proved that some time ago so there is no need to mention it again” on page 8 of some thread. Would it kill you to actually state the facts again?
I think the opposite. As much as I dislike the teabaggers I think the teabaggers are a pretty good indicator that we live in a democracy. Why is it that almost everyone (including the Israel apologists) will admit that there is at least some problems with Israel but you cannot seem to bring yourself to admit even that much.
As a critic of Israel, I wouldn’t want to hang my hat on this incidence as the smoking gun. In light of Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law - Wikipedia it is difficult for me to approach this case without a jaundiced eye.
[quote=“Malthus, post:288, topic:547472”]
In this case the guy is appealing the verdict - but not on the basis he didn’t lie. He’s appealing on the basis that the punishment for lying is too harsh.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/weird/2010/07/23/14807736.html
[quote]
He was sentenced to 18 months in jail, but his lawyer, Adnan Aladdin, said that’s too much.
…
Well, that sounds like an admission of actual guilt to me rather than one of those “I’ll plead guilty to get a lighter sentence because I know this kangaroo court is going to convict me whether or not I did it” sort of guilty pleas. I will note two things:
Some people still seem to think the law is being applied with prejudice (but I think its iffy either way).
His lawyer’s name is Aladdin? I don’t think I’ve ever seen that name IRL before.
Uh, that’s exactly what I was trying to say – that a twin switching WOULD constitute rape by deception. DUH. In other words, I can see where this law WOULD work in certain cases. (Such as the case of a twin pretending to be his brother and fucking said brother’s wife) But in the case listed in the OP? NO.
GAH!!!
Offer her $5 for them at a garage sale like anyone else.
And you’d be wrong. Neither is an accusation of anti-semitism.
An anti-Semite is someone who hates Jews and/or believes negative things about them as a group.
Red Fury, for instance, is an anti-Semite because he believes that all Jews in politics are potential traitors and believes that naming everybody in the US government who he remembers whose name sounds Jewish to him is a good way of catching those sneaky traitor Jews who are such a problem. Ivan is an anti-Semite because he believes that Jews are money grubbing people with a superiority complex who use the Mossad as their representative organization to commit every type of crime on Earth.
Pointing out that people, especially and your fellow travelers, are fine with anti-Israel shit and won’t say anything about anti-Israel since it’s the right target, but you would if it was anti-Palestinian, let alone any ‘wrong’ minority group like blacks or gays does not say you’re anti-Semites.
You seem to have also confused ionizer with pretty vacant. It was the latter who stated that, because of me, it was understandable that some people would confirm bigotry against Israel and/or people who don’t oppose Israel. That, too, is not an accusation of anti-Semitism.
And while I’m at it, I’ve called out Sam Stone, for instance, over his errors when he’s taken a pro-Israel position on a few occasions. How many of the anti-Israel brigade here have ever done the same for people arguing an anti-Israel position?
Honestly what would the reaction be if we changed your admission of anti-Israel bigotry to one of kneejerk anti-gay (or black, or whoever) bigotry? Do you really, honestly and truly believe that it would be acceptable if someone said that they have a kneejerk anti-black reaction and automatically sort any new information into an anti-black narrative that they really have to work on so it doesn’t dominate their thinking? How would that play on the Dope, do you think?
Do you think that ‘in context’ it would be totally cool if they said they have that automatic anti-black narrative due to Farrakhan or whoever? Or would people say that’s no excuse at all?
Answer honestly. If you said the same exact thing you said about Israel, but instead said it about blacks (or about Palestine, and said it was understandable that you did due to Arafat’s behavior), what would the reaction have been?
But of course it’s acceptable when the target isn’t blacks, but Israel.
Why is that?
Can you answer that without the “Ah-hah! So you’re accusing everybody of hating Jews, aren’t you?”
No, they kept bringing it up. And even if they didn’t, what does that tell you that people will automatically make certain accusations without bothering to check the facts first? It wasn’t exactly hard. The search terms? “International law maritime blockade, -israel”.
The first hit is the Sam Remo Manual.
See, this is part of the problem here. You use a fictional charge of ‘claims or hints of anti-semitism’, then act somewhat reasonable for a paragraph or two, and then you’re back to this kind of dishonesty. The fact that it’s a common falsehood doesn’t make it any better, either. In the very thread you were just discussing, I mentioned many times that I thought that the blockade was needlessly harsh and caused undue suffering among the people of Gaza.
And that’s just one example, but it doesn’t fit into your fiction.
Your behavior is, however, S.O.P. among your fellow travelers. There was one thread where I stated, clearly and explicitly, that I believed that if Israel didn’t halt all settlement expansion immediately that the US should turn off the spigot and case all aid. Just a few posts later, Red Fury was back trolling me and claiming that I never criticize Israel and support everything they do. And, predictably, the anti-Israel posters in the thread didn’t call him to task.
It’s the same old, same old.
It’s a perfectly cromulent name. There’s an Egyptian author named Muhammed Aladdin.
Personally I give you shit because you’re a fucking dick with the social skills of a petulant five year old.
Case in point, you have on multiple occasions now accused both me and other of being liars. I must have asked about five times now for you to point out what I have lied about.
You have yet to do so.
Let’s go over that again, you have again and again accused me of being a liar but refuse to actually tell me what I am lying about.
So it has nothing to do with you “pointing out the facts”. It has everything to do with your utter lack of social skills or an ability to discuss in an adult manner. You simply cannot go around accusing everyone and his dog of being a liar without actually backing any of it up. You may think you have backed it up, but I am telling you straight up, right now, that regarding you accusing me of lying on multiple occasions in this thread (and as you do in every thread were I try to treat you like an adult) you have done absolutely nothing to back it up. You haven’t pointed out what I am lying about. You haven’t explained why it is a lie and not just an opinion that is different to yours. You haven’t done anything even close to that. All you have done is accuse me of being a liar, a bigot and God knows what else.
That is why I give you shit. Nothing to do with you “pointing out the facts”. Nothing to do with (apparently) being part of “the anti-Israel usual suspects”. It has everything to do with you being a fucking dick that has chosen to give me shit without having any reason to or attempting to back it up.
I’ll say it one more time for you. You think I am anti-Israel because I only come down on Israel and not the Palestinians. As I have said many time to you now, I think both groups are utter shits. It is just over the past year and a half, approximately the period I have dealt with you, the Palestinians haven’t actually been doing much. Yes, they have fired a small amount of rockets into Israel (and it is small, last year only saw 160 that weren’t fired when Israel were invading Gaza), but the fact remains that these are for the most part ineffectual. The majority don’t even register as causing damage, never mind hurting anyone. In the same period, Israel has flattened Gaza, executed someone in Dubai using forged passports from my country and invaded a peaceful (and yes, it was peaceful. The guns were brought on the ships by the Israelis) flotilla, killing around ten people in the process.
That’s why I come across as anti-Israel to you. Both Israel and the Palestinians are utter shits, IMHO, that case more about ideology than human life, but in the past year and a half Israel have been way, way, way bigger shits than the Palestinians. That is simply undeniable.
But no doubt in your mind that makes me a liar.
Kindly refrain from lying while moaning about how awful it is that you’ve been caught lying. I just pointed out to you that I’d made it quite clear what I was calling you out on when I called you out for any of your instances of lying. Your feigned lack of comprehension is not exactly novel, either. If you had an honest question, you might quote the places I’ve pointed out that you’re lying, and challenge them. Instead, you pretend I haven’t done so and, instead, post again and again and again about how you want me to show what the actual instances of you lying are.
It’s a bit of trolling that, I’m sure, will go unremarked by your fellow travelers, as usual.
To remind you, as you seem to have a conveniently short memory but a surplus of retard strength spew:
Of course, not only did you not provide a cite for your lie about my statements on the number of rockets, or “rockets” as you call them, you immediately feigned non-comprehension. You’re not even a particularly good troll. You ask for an instance where you’re lying (and in the process you lie some more), I specifically point out that you’ve just said something that is a lie… and then you immediately start moaning again about how I won’t point out any specifics as to what you’re lying about.
If you can’t troll harder, at least troll smarter.
What I find chuckleworthy is that Frothing Again has his head so far up his own arse he thinks this is a confession!
Now, I’m not really that mithered about being called an anti-semite by FA, as everyone but the most blind motherfucker on the planet, knows that he is a raving nutjob with an OCD for producing excessively long, dreary, repetitive, fanwanking posts in favour of Israeli policies, but all the same, I’d like a clarification by some neutrals as to what makes a person an anti-semite. I thought actions were what makes a person who they are, not thoughts unacted upon?
I accept posting my thoughts on here is an action, but can anyone seriously say they are an act of hatred?
I’ll take onboard anyone’s opinion other than Flail Angrily’s, regarding this matter.
WHERE?
Seriously. Just show me where I am lying! How difficult is that?
The sheer act of discussing things with you is my cite. We have discussed rockets before. This isn’t GD, I am not going to search through past discussions to look for a cite. I don’t have to. I know how you argue. I know your opinions. So no, that wasn’t a lie.
Question: if you don’t think the rockets are raining down on Israel and you don’t think there are loads of suicide attacks in Israel (according to Wikipedia the most recent one was 2.5 years ago: List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia) how can you justify the way Israel treats Palestine, especially the Gaza Strip?
What actually are the Palestinians doing that justifies the way they are treated?