 | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | (...) I think I clarified that. I said that if they *support* terrorists, they are as *culpable* as terrorists. Since the PLO represents them, they are in the unfortunate position of supporting terrorism. They are being woefully misled. Or (...) (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —David Koudys
|
| | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) <snip> (...) I just thought that those two lines should be viewed together. No reason... Just because the atrocity is sanctioned by the government, it doesn't make the atrocity (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | (...) No reason? I think you definitely had a reason. But if it is to imply that I hate Scott, you're wrong. I disagree with him, and I called him an idiot because what he proposed was idiocy-- that's all. (...) Which "heinous war crimes" is Israel (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) *sigh* (...) 2 Examples of Israel's terrorism: 1. How would you describe what Ariel Sharon done to the village of Qibya in 1953? 2. How about their planned attacks on cinemas inside Egypt? Scott A (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I was kinda going for a tongue-in-cheek thing there. It was a 'Hatred exists because of intolerance, you idiot!' thing--saying 'you idiot' expressing hatred and intolerance. You go on to say that what you should have sid in the first place, (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) lol sorry, guess I didn't parse that too well through space:-) (...) lol again, if it were that easy to shut down Scott, it would be employed *more* often>;-) There's no 'wiggle room', room for (...) I would certainly say that to a reasonable (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) John, Your whole thesis appears to be: 1) Arabs/Palestinians are uncivilised troublemakers. 2) Israel is a peace loving nation. 3) There is an international anti-Israeli media conspiracy which distorts reality. However, to date, you have (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I was referring to PLO *terrorists*. (...) Never said that. What would Israel know of peace?? She has never been allowed to exist in peace! Yes, Israel *would like* to exist in peace, but for now, Israel would just like to exist, period. (...) (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) So, if it is only the PLO terrorists who are uncivilised troublemakers, why are you anti-Palestinian? (...) Let’s just question this. Why did Meir (and her cabinet) turn down a cease-fire offer from Nasser (made via the USA?) on 7th Feb 1970? (...) (22 years ago, 26-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) <typing slowly so you will finally get it> The Palestinians *support* the PLO and all of their terrorist activity. The PLO murders *on behalf* of the Palestinians, *with their blessing*. *That* is why I am against them. Let them renounce the (...) (22 years ago, 26-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I think the point Scott is trying to make is that not *all Palestinians* support the PLO, just as not all Americans support Dubya. Therefore, saying that you are against Palestinians (implying *all*) because they support the PLO is not a (...) (22 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Comparing the Palestinian "system" with ours is a stretch, and you'd be surprised how many Americans *support* Bush on certain policies (such as terrorism), but putting that aside for the moment... I thought his point was that not all (...) (22 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | the song of peace (was Re: jumping to conclusions) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I think he was comparing people not "systems". (...) Very few occupied peoples do have open and free political systems. The world is full of oppressive regimes... Arafat heads one of them. What you fail to recognise is that Israeli occupation (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Can I assume that you wholly agree with the text you have deleted? (...) You said “never”. I proved you wrong. There appears to be a lot of these “isolated incidents”? How many does it take to prove Israeli belligerence to you? (...) Which books? (...) (22 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I think this is a very important point, which I would like to see more focus on. It is a sad fact that occupied people tend to use violent and immoral action against the occupiying force. It should also be noted that such actions, which can be (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I use the term "terrorism" as the specific, random targeting of civilians for the purpose of terrorizing them. Notice I don't even mention intent other than to terrorize. There is no rationality behind terrorism beyond terrorizing. It is (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Let's just stick to the normal usage/definition of words... not your distorted definition. I think this is pretty good: "Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) What part of my definition would you consider a distortion? But even with the definition you supplied, I wouldn't call the example Fredrik provided "terrorism". -John I think this is pretty good: (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I shall let you think about that... it is full of holes. (...) Either would I, but I don't know all that much about it. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 30-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) When have I said that "PLO terrorism" is justified? John, it is time for you to put-up or shut-up! Scott A (22 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Good point! We should look with more sympathy on the actions of the Palestinians given their plight. Chris (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Ha, nice try. But you are too clever by half. There *is* no country "Palestine". Why not? But thank you for the invitation, but I care not to sympathize with homicidal terrorists, no matter what their plight. Terrorism is *wrong* and *evil*, (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | (...) But yet, you refuse to condemn Israeli terrorism! Or even acknowledge the role of your own country in supporting terrorism. You claim all Palestinian’s are "PLO terrorists". You are unable to acknowledge the most simple of truths about Israel. (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) What Sharon did *ALMOST 50 YEARS AGO* was wrong-- Israel itself is not proud of some of those early day policies. But that was a long, long, time ago. Times have changed, and so has Israel's policies. Citing events that occured almost a half (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Wasted breath alert —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | IMHO, subject says it all. Most of the participants know this already, so a "wasted breath alert" is in itself wasted breath, I guess. I don't see a lot of movement happening. Remember who you're dealing with, everyone. All parties already know how (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Wasted breath alert —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | *sigh* Scott A =+= Have you inspected Arthur’s Seat yet? (URL) reasonable man adapts himself to suit his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment to suit himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) This makes it seem that you don't understand how we "fight terrorism" on stage and toss terrorists scraps under the table. Do you really believe all that one-sided Amerika is the land of goodness tripe? We are a political entity and we do evil (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Doing the only thing they can? Strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up women, kids, houses and villages? Only thing they can?? I don't care what the world could throw at me, there will *never* come a time when I would feel justified to (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) They have a rock to move and no lever. There are lands that they believe are by rights theirs that the state of Israel has occupied for a long time. They want an Israeli withdrawl. They've tried many things including appeal to the world (...) (22 years ago, 5-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Great! When will he go on trial? When will his victims be compensated? Given Israel’s strong record in tracking down war criminals from WW2, it would be hypocracy if he was not put on trial would it not? (...) Indeed it was. But Sabra and (...) (22 years ago, 25-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | (...) D A N G E R ! Big mistake Dave. You are being objective. This is nothing but evidence of: a) Your bias. b) Your support for "PLO terrorists". c) The power of the international anti-Israeli media conspiracy. In the future, try to view this as a (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) Here's another question to help reduce my ignorance: what's the source of the claims that I've heard again and again and again and again in the various media that the PLO in particular and vocal extremist groups in the Arab world in general (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | (...) Who knows? I don't doubt that these views exist. I don't doubt that the there are those who have the same views on just about any race or religion. I don't doubt that the rather colourful metaphors used as part of some cultures make things (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) You said: 1. “Sorry, there isn't one. “ 2. “The PLO represent the Palestinians.” 3. “Whatever the PLO does, the Palestinians support them.” 4. “Anyone who supports the actions of terrorists is just as culpable as the terrorists themselves.” (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) So what's a Palestinian to do? Speak out against the PLO? Peacemakers aren't very welcome in the Arab world--just ask Sadat's widow. (...) None really, except to note that the US media is getting *so* biased that it is surprising even itself. (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | avoiding the conclusion (was Re: jumping to conclusions) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | John, I started by saying you were jumping to conclusions, now I feel you are avoiding the conclusion. I had hoped that your formal study of the “Israeli-Arab Dilemma” would mean that I would be provided with some meaningful insight into the current (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) There are two belligerents in this conflict – you fail to acknowledge that. (...) Shocking is it not? Perhaps we should all just get our news from the Israeli government and its apologists? (...) independent ; “not influenced or controlled in (...) (22 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
