See, this is my problem here. I don’t see that plausible argument. You’ve said that reasonable people could disagree, and that there is a plausible argument for their position… but what is it? All of the evidence points to Hamas wanting nothing, at all, to do with peace. All of the evidence.
Now… sure, we could say that “well, a miracle will occur and Hamas will reform” type arguments are possible, but plausible? That’s what I’m asking for here. What piece of evidence, of fact, elevates the ‘a miracle occurs’ argument from a mere pipe dream?
I mean, hell… I remember when I was a kid in school doing proofs in math class; from time to time, I knew what the answers were, but couldn’t figure out the steps to get there, for the life of me. I’d almost always simply write out the beginning and end of the proof, with “then a miracle happens” somewhere in the middle. To my mind, the arguments that Hamas will suddenly accept peace have the “then a miracle happens” line in their proof.
As I said, I’m willing to accept that this is a plausible rather than simply a (remotely) possible scenario, but as of yet, I’ve seen no real evidence. And I’m not going to dress up blind faith as reasoned disagreement if nobody can actually point out the reasons behind it. I think that’s fair, no?
Nope, you’re not mistaken. This is, IIRC, Play Number 207 in the Israel-Basher’s handbook.
If someone like Carter is outed as being a habitual liar, whose lies serve an agenda, and who wants to prop up genocidal rejectionists? Then whoever pointed out those facts also must be a wacko who’ll call anybody an anti-Semite who disagrees with him. It avoids having to discuss the actual meat of the topic (notice, nobody, at all, has yet even addressed Carter’s habit of lying constantly about Israel). It , often, easily switches the debate from whatever its subject was to Israel-Bashers complaining about how very persecuted they are.
You should know better, John. Really, you should.
The US “seemingly supports” Israel no matter what?
Where is the official US embassy located in Israel? Jerusalem, or Tel Aviv?
Has the US signed off on at least one UN resolution calling settlements illegal?
Etc…
Yes, the US has a close bond with Israel. Yes, it has supported a great deal of what Israel has done. But come on, no matter what?
[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion]
I think there are enough code words in there so we know what Finn is talking about.
[/quote]
That’s okay, I’m sure you think a lot of things.
Be sure to keep your Decoder Ring out to spot all the other Code that I use.
Mwahahah!
[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion]
It sure would be nice if Finn could carry on a discussion on this topic without resorting to personally insulting people, including fellow posters. It would make it, you know, more like a debate.
[/quote]
Sure, and as long as you retract all of your mistakes, bit of ignorance, willful distortions of the facts and times when you simply imagined things, I’ll believe that you’re here for, you know, a debate.
Why you seem to think that showing how someone’s position is bullshit is somehow out of bounds for a debate, I have no idea. A debate includes refutation and a scrupulous adherence to proof, facts, verification and epistemology.
This aint a tea party.
[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion]
It’s simply not plausible to claim the Israelis didn’t know what was going on.
[/quote]
And yet, a report that you just relied on to make your case says, clearly, that large elements in both MI and Mossad didn’t “know what was going on.” Again, you have made a massive mistake that is directly contradicted by something you, yourself, cited. It also can’t be out of ignorance, as not only did you cite it, I quoted it to you. You know, for a fact, that not only is it “plausible”, but that the Commission found that exactly that was the case.
Actually, you’ve invented that fiction, too. I quoted the Commission’s report, which happened to be housed on the JVL. I did not, at any point, quote the JVL.
As for what Fisk claims, it’s interesting that the very document you offered as some sort of definitive cite.. makes no mention of such a claim. Surely something that was public knowledge and not, ya know, made up would’ve wound up in the Commission’s findings. And speaking of bullshit, Fisk is a fucking 9/11 Truther Interesting, of course, how you quickly ditched what you were claiming was a cite that supported your position, neglected to retract any of your mistakes… and now cite a 9/11 truther as an authority. Of course, aside from the fact that the man is a raving loon, there’s his tendency to make shit up wrt Israel.
As you apparently have no desire to play straight, and your posting has now devolved into standard Pit level posting, I’m done playing your game. I’ve fought your ignorance and anybody reading along can make up their own minds whether you’re talking facts or bullshit.
[QUOTE=spoke-]
Speaking of vile, this is character assassination of the vilest sort.
[/quote]
Ah, yes, we reach the stage in the debate where folks just start inventing definitions for words.“Character assassination” doesn’t mean “relating facts”. It just doesn’t.
[QUOTE=spoke-]
Carter has only ever sought to promote peace. You may disagree with how he goes about the task, but to suggest that he has some hidden and sinister motive is beyond the pale.
[/quote]
What bullshit is this?
An habitual liar, with a political agenda, who attempts to give power to genocidal rejectionists is working for peace? What Orwellian twisting of language are you using whereby Carter’s lies, designed to strip Israel of its ability to defend itself, are actually in the service of “peace”?
You do know that, just like character assassination has its own definition, you can’t substitute “the peace of the grave” for “peace”.
Sorry, no. This kind of bullshit may fly over beers in a pub, but it shouldn’t in GD. It never fails to amaze me that a certain faction will, almost without fail, look at someone’s PR and take that at face value, as long as the PR is for the “right” side. To claim that any supporter of Hamas wants peace, as long as they’re not too damn ignorant to participate in an informed debate, is laughable. It’s like saying that someone can want the KKK to become a major part of American politics, but they want racial harmony. Some people are Useful Idiots who support yet another genocidal, Jew-hating regime, and are honestly baffled at why supporting a group bent on genocide might put paid to claims that they want peace.
But hey, looking at someone in context, his habits, goals, lies and reasons for lying is beyond the pale in your view.
Spinning a debate with politically motivated, counterfactual bullshit is beyond the pale, in mine.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
[QUOTE=spoke-]
I get mighty fucking sick of this mindset that it’s not possible to disagree with Israeli policy without being an anti-Semite.
[/QUOTE]
Holy shit, we actually got to the second page before the Israel-Bashing-Brigade actually brought up that canard. I’m impressed.
Of course, you totally made that up and I challenge you to find a single person, anywhere, who has actually said that any and all criticism of Israel is “anti-Semitic”.
