Subject:
|
Re: jumping to conclusions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 27 Apr 2002 16:45:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1469 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > > Since the PLO represents them, they are in the
> > > unfortunate position of supporting terrorism. They are being woefully misled.
> >
> > This really is nonsense. Tony Blair can be said to represent me, that does
> > not mean I necessarily support him
>
> 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.
There are two belligerents in this conflict – you fail to acknowledge that.
>
> > > As an aside, I happen to live in a state whose major newspaper, (and I use that
> > > term loosely) The Minneapolis Star and Tribune, is about the most biased paper
> > > in the US. A different editorial staff from another city even criticized it for
> > > that reason. I'll have to see if I can dig up the sources.
> >
> > Relevance?
>
> None really, except to note that the US media is getting *so* biased that it is
> surprising even itself.
Shocking is it not? Perhaps we should all just get our news from the Israeli
government and its apologists?
> > >
> > >
> > > Rather than alleging some sort of international media
> > > > conspiracy,
> > >
> > > Not conspiracy, just liberal bias. It's a fact. I have friends in the media,
> > > and they acknowledge it, too. If you want to believe that the media is
> > > unbiased, that's your business, but you'd be wrong.
> >
> > Have you got any independent confirmation that there is an anti-Israeli bias
> > in the press?
>
> What exactly is "independent confirmation"?
independent ; “not influenced or controlled in any way by other people,
events or things”
confirmation : “to give certainty”
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Who else can they turn to? International law is on their side. UN
> > > > resolutions support them... but still justice has not been served.
> > >
> > > The UN Charter called for them to set up their own state *54 YEARS AGO*. What
> > > have they been waiting for!!
> >
> > They were dealt a bad hand.
>
> By the Israelis???!!! No! The PLO should be terrorizing the UN!
Are the UN the force of occupation? Have they started wars deliberately in
the M.E.?
> >
>
> > > > > And let's see an unequivocal acknowledgment from the Arab world of the right for
> > > > > Israel to exist as a sovereign nation.
> > > >
> > > > Is that not what is being offered right now? What has the Israeli response been?
> > >
> > > What do you expect their response to be??!! The proof is in the pudding, my
> > > friend.
> >
> > Answer the question!
>
> How about:
>
> "You've *already* promised that many homicide bombings ago. Excuse us if we
> seem skeptical"
Just answer the question!
> > > Any Palestinian could be a human bomb, for all
> > > they know... That tends to skew one's perception of a population-- a perception
> > > brought on by that population.
> >
> > Strange how the UK was able to control a terrorist situation in the UK
> > without firing rockets into residential areas.
>
> Relevance?
The UK was able to contain a very real terrorist threat within the realm of
uk/international law. Mistakes were made, but overall we got it right.
> >
> > >
> > Are you saying Sharon has no blood on his hands? Seriously?
>
> Relevance? Or are you implying that Arafat is an innocent?
ROFL. In the text you deleted immediately above I had actually written:
“I agree that Arafat is a problem, but the same can be said of Sharon –
both have blood on their hands.”
*S I G H*
AGAIN : Are you saying Sharon has no blood on his hands? Seriously?
> >
> > > > Who “started” the current round of violence?
> > >
> > > Current schmurrent. Who started the war in '48?
> >
> > Answer the question!
>
> Relevance? But if you'd like me to answer the question, it needs to be more
> specific, unless you'd like to provide what *you* think started it?
Just answer the question!
> >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > But I don't believe it will happen, because the Arab world loves its hatred for
> > > > > the Jews more than it cares about the plight of the Palestinians-- it's as
> > > > > simple as that. Unfortunately, the Palestinians are caught in the middle.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your stated view is a generalisation. But why do you think that “hate” exists?
> > >
> > > You say so.
> >
> > It’s a fact.
>
> ??? It's a fact that my stated view is a generalization? Even if it were true,
> it wouldn't necessarily negate it.
> >
> > > Hatred exists because of intolerance. This whole thing started
> > > because the Arabs couldn't tolerate a Jewish state.
Put yourself in their shoes just for one second.
> > > >
> > > > > Time will tell, and the longer this drags on, the more I will be proven right.
> > > >
> > > > Time will tell. Perhaps this will end when the USA stops funding Israel to
> > > > the tune of ~$2.5B pa. Perhaps that will force Israel to negotiate?
> > >
> > > You idiot.
> >
> > *sigh*
>
> Sorry, but it was such an idiotic statement.
> >
> > > We will *never* stop supporting Israel. *Their* allegiance could be
> > > argued to be more valuable than yours (England).
> >
> > I’m not English, I don’t live in England.
>
> My misteak. Meant UK.
Don’t worry about it; I rather enjoy your brand of geopolitics! ;)
> >
> > I should hope the “allegiance” is valuable, given that the US pays Israel
> > the equivalent of >$400 per head of population. It’s just a pity they
> > humiliated your president last week on the international stage… not very
> > good value for money!
>
> Israel is not our lap dog. We cannot tell them what to do or not to do. We
> support them because it is in the best interests of *our* country, not
> necessarily theirs.
So the USA exploits them?
> >
> > >
> > > But speaking of funding, let's see the Arabs throw a few billion towards the
> > > Palestinians that *isn't* in the form of weaponry...
> >
> > Are you saying they give nothing? Are you saying Jordan has not helped?
>
> Jordan *expelled* thousands of Palestinians...
When? The late 60’s? During the attempted overthrow of King H?
Take a look at who supports the UN’s work in the camps.
>
> Are
> > you saying Syria did not offer to take 300,000 refugees in ’49 – even though
> > they only had 100,000 within their borders at that time?
>
> To be assimulated, or to rot in refugee camps for entire generations?
They offered permanent settlement of half the refugees.
Scott A
>
> -John
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: jumping to conclusions
|
| (...) 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. (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
