• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Slow News Day in israel

Skeptic

Banned
S
Joined
Jul 25, 2001
Messages
18,312
From friday's papers in israel:

1). Kids on a hanukkah visit to an artillery battery were treated to a cool demonstration: the battery happened to have orders to bomb Gaza with live artillery shells, so the kids stayed around to watch the battery's "tolarim" (mobile artillery pieces) fire live ammuntion into the Gaza strip.

2). Kids from a nearby kibbutz on a trip next to the Gaza border, together with their parents, decided on a whim to visit the base of the Egyptian soldiers in the Gaza border crossing. The result was a hafla (party) with the kids teaching the soldiers hannukah songs and they teaching the kids Egyptian folk dances.

3). In Eilat, israel's southern city, a woman decided to marry a dolphin in a large ceremony. She's 45, he's (it's?) 35; they've known each other for a decade. I doubt the marriage has legal meaning, but it was widely reported.

4). A suicide bomber, aiming to blow up a children's hannukah party, was stopped in one of the inhuman, human-right-violating checkpoints, and blew himself up there, instead. He killied an israeli officer and two Palestinian occupants in the cab he was riding, which (investigators believe) didn't know about his mission. I'd call him and those who sent him an inhuman monster, but that would be racist and judgemental, so I won't.

5). (OK, I'm cheating--this one's a few weeks old) An investigation into one of the suicide bombings in israel found out that a single suicide bombing was supposed to be a double suicide bombing, but the second would-be bomber didn't show up. He was sick with the flu and didn't feel well.

You know what (1)-(5), together, are called in israel?

A slow news day.
 
What is this thread about?

Skeptic, finish the year 2005 by apologizing to Zep, would you please?

=============================

Really slow news day:
Palestinian security source: IAF fire kills 2 Palestinians in Gaza no-go zone


Nothing to see here, move along...
 
The Fool, where ya been hiding? It's a really slow news day in Israel, and I just know you can find something to post --- as hammmegk says, Do it!

Here's my parting shot for 2005 on this thread:

  • Reflective vest law for cars takes effect
    By Sharon Kedmi, Ha'Aretz

    Starting today, a reflective safety vest must be kept in all vehicles, and drivers must don the vest when exiting their vehicle after stopping on a highway. The law applies to all vehicles in Israel, including private cars, commercial vehicles, motorcycles and quad bikes.
    The Transportation Ministry says that the obligation to wear the vest is intended to increase the driver's visibility during the day and at night, while making repairs or getting help.

Does anyone know of a similar requirement in other countries?
 
webfusion said:
Skeptic, finish the year 2005 by apologizing to Zep, would you please?
Click to expand...

Well, I didn't mean Zep in particular. I mean the "peace camp" and "moderates" in general. They seem not to grasp the very simple, very obvious truth: that the Palestinian goal, openly stated numerous times, is the destruction of israel and the annihilation/expulsion of the jews.

I didn't intend it to mean, and I apologize if that was the way it was seen, that Zep will support this Palestinian goal due to some inherent hatered of jews. He will, however, I believe, deny this goal more and more fiercely the more obvious it becomes (if it does), because otherwise he will have to admit to himself he had unwittingly supported a bunch of murderers.

It's a psychological defense mechanism we've seen over and over again. Most recently, it was seen with those who were pro-communist. The more obvious the USSR's crimes, the more clear that the entire "socialist utopia" is a failure, the more shrill they became in supporting it and the more the blamed "Capitalist imperialism" as the "root cause" of whatever was wrong with the USSR & co. (Think of Noam Chomsky blaming Pol Pot's massacres on the USA, for instance.)

I was, in fact, quoting Efraim Kishon's famous article after the Yom Kippur war. In the 1950s he wrote an article "How israel can gain the world's goodwill"--namely, by letting the Arabs slaughter us all. In the 1970s, after the Yom Kippur war, he changed his mind. He wrote then that such an outcome would only mean more hatered of israel and the jews, and more demonization and "explanation" why we all had it coming.

Why? Because, he said quite rightly, there is nothing more hated than those who remind you you are a naval--the Hebrew word usually translated as "bastard", "son of a bitch", etc., but here used in the original sense, that of "morally worthless", i.e., due to one's unwitting support of genocidal antisemites mascarading (poorly) as "poor occupied us".

It's not antisemitism or support of genocide that will lead to Zep's reaction, which I rather confidently predict would occur if things go that way. It would be, rather, psychological denial. And to repeat, I don't think Zep in particular is like that. It's a very common ailment. It is, in fact, present in virtually all the European bien pensant chattering class, as Efraim Kishon already noted.

So, if you want me to apologize for calling Zep an antisemite, I do because I never did say he was one. If you want me to apologize for saying Zep intentionally supports genocide, i do because I never did say he did. What I did say--and I stand behind it because I believe it to be true--is that Zep will, if things keep going from bad to worse, will eventually come to realize or suspect the true Palestinian goal, and that once he does, he will blame israel and not the Palestinians, because of a psychological defense mechanism.
 
I'm hoping for peace in Israel and the Palestinian areas for the new year.

Amongst all my wishes, this is the one I really hope will come true.

Shalom!
 
Skeptic said:
So, if you want me to apologize for calling Zep an antisemite, I do because I never did say he was one.
Click to expand...
No skeppers....Zep wants you to withdraw the stuff you made up about him....but you won't because you never have in the past and I don't think you care.. So it looks like you will just rely on another lie, this time simply rewriting what you claim you said.

you make stuff up and attribute these fantasies to other posters.....its as simple as that, most of us have got used to it but sometimes a fresh target like zep gets upset....I guess you will have to keep making stuff up about him until he gets used to it eh?
 
Last edited:
Skeptic said:
He will, however, I believe, deny this goal more and more fiercely the more obvious it becomes (if it does), because otherwise he will have to admit to himself he had unwittingly supported a bunch of murderers.
Click to expand...
But this is the lie for which he demands an apology.

Zep has never been an apologist for Palestinian extremism of any stripe. You can see this quite clearly for yourself by doing a forum search for Zep using the words "Israel", "Israeli", "Palestine", "Palestinian", etc, as I did when this dispute first came up.

Possibly you are mixing him up with someone else.

Your claims are entirely unfounded. You owe him an apology.
 
Dr Adequate said:
But this is the lie for which he demands an apology.
Click to expand...

It's not a lie for the simple reason that it is obviously a prediction, not a claim of something he did. Unfortunately, I think this prediction is accurate. Of course I could be wrong but I doubt it.
 
Skeptic said:
It's not a lie for the simple reason that it is obviously a prediction, not a claim of something he did. Unfortunately, I think this prediction is accurate. Of course I could be wrong but I doubt it.
Click to expand...
No...its a lie.....as is your clumsy attempts to revise what you said.

you said "The reason is simple: Zep & co. had, stupidly, supported "Palestinian Liberation" for years."

its a "prediction" is it?

pathetic.....have a good long look at yourself and what you have become on this forum.
 
Not Zep in particular, then why use his name?

On this one, I'm agreeing with DrA and TF.

SKeptic, you could have said this and stopped:

Well, I didn't mean Zep in particular. I apologize for using his name in connection with '& co.'

That would have worked fine. I read the entire "apology" you offered, and somewhere among Kishon, the USSR, Chomsky, and predictions, it seems that you didn't really mean Zep when typing Zep.

NOTE to ZEP: While this appears to be the most backwards apology I have seen in a long time, it still officially serves as one, Zep. Take it and drop your sig, we beg of you!
 
Skeptic said:
Well, I didn't mean Zep in particular. I mean the "peace camp" and "moderates" in general. They seem not to grasp the very simple, very obvious truth: that the Palestinian goal, openly stated numerous times, is the destruction of israel and the annihilation/expulsion of the jews.

I didn't intend it to mean, and I apologize if that was the way it was seen, that Zep will support this Palestinian goal due to some inherent hatered of jews. He will, however, I believe, deny this goal more and more fiercely the more obvious it becomes (if it does), because otherwise he will have to admit to himself he had unwittingly supported a bunch of murderers.

It's a psychological defense mechanism we've seen over and over again. Most recently, it was seen with those who were pro-communist. The more obvious the USSR's crimes, the more clear that the entire "socialist utopia" is a failure, the more shrill they became in supporting it and the more the blamed "Capitalist imperialism" as the "root cause" of whatever was wrong with the USSR & co. (Think of Noam Chomsky blaming Pol Pot's massacres on the USA, for instance.)

I was, in fact, quoting Efraim Kishon's famous article after the Yom Kippur war. In the 1950s he wrote an article "How israel can gain the world's goodwill"--namely, by letting the Arabs slaughter us all. In the 1970s, after the Yom Kippur war, he changed his mind. He wrote then that such an outcome would only mean more hatered of israel and the jews, and more demonization and "explanation" why we all had it coming.

Why? Because, he said quite rightly, there is nothing more hated than those who remind you you are a naval--the Hebrew word usually translated as "bastard", "son of a bitch", etc., but here used in the original sense, that of "morally worthless", i.e., due to one's unwitting support of genocidal antisemites mascarading (poorly) as "poor occupied us".

It's not antisemitism or support of genocide that will lead to Zep's reaction, which I rather confidently predict would occur if things go that way. It would be, rather, psychological denial. And to repeat, I don't think Zep in particular is like that. It's a very common ailment. It is, in fact, present in virtually all the European bien pensant chattering class, as Efraim Kishon already noted.

So, if you want me to apologize for calling Zep an antisemite, I do because I never did say he was one. If you want me to apologize for saying Zep intentionally supports genocide, i do because I never did say he did. What I did say--and I stand behind it because I believe it to be true--is that Zep will, if things keep going from bad to worse, will eventually come to realize or suspect the true Palestinian goal, and that once he does, he will blame israel and not the Palestinians, because of a psychological defense mechanism.
Click to expand...
I will accept your apology in the spirit of reconciliation, and in order to get my normal sig back because so many have complained about the one I put up. ;)

Otherwise, Skep, can I suggest you DON'T bet on racehorses or greyhounds. You seem to have an uncanny knack for picking the wrong thing to bet your shirt on!

And don't push your luck - the highlighted comments ARE SIMPLY NOT TRUE! THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN! There are people in this world, believe it or not, who support neither side of the Arab/Israeli conflict. I'm one of those people. I have no agenda to meet, have taken no sides, I have no fixed ideas of the situation, and to be honest, I don't have the depth of knowledge to form any.

Certainly I do not support terrorism or violence as a means of policy enforcement anywhere, whoever perpetrates it! That means I do not support Palestinian violence. Did you get that? But then I also don't support Pakistani violence, Indonesian violence, Russian violence, Ethiopian violence, nor even US violence. Nor Israeli violence. In fact, you can leave out all the proper adjectives entirely - I don't support ANYBODY'S violence as a political mechanism. Clear?

Furthermore, your refusal to believe this position is your problem, not mine. And imposing your own biases and fantasies at whim on other people doesn't help win friends, although it does help influence people...badly.
 
Zep said:
And don't push your luck - the highlighted comments ARE SIMPLY NOT TRUE! THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN!
Click to expand...

I hope so, Zep, I hope so. But I am not at all sure this will be the case. I am speaking, alas, from experience. I have met quite a few people who claim to be be "objective" and just "want peace" and yet, whenever there is some atrocity perpetuated by the Palestinians, they always defend it and claim it's israel's fault. There is also another issue. People, as long as the change is gradual enough, will come to do things they never intended to do.

Certainly I do not support terrorism or violence as a means of policy enforcement anywhere, whoever perpetrates it! That means I do not support Palestinian violence. Did you get that? But then I also don't support Pakistani violence, Indonesian violence, Russian violence, Ethiopian violence, nor even US violence. Nor Israeli violence.

That's the problem, Zep, that's precisely the problem. To support "neither israeli nor Palestinian violence"--that is, to support neither the genocidal attempt to throw the jews into the sea nor what the jews do in an attempt to not be thrown into the sea--is not morality, but indifference.

"I hate violence whomever does it" obliterates the all-important distinction between agression and self-defense, and is, as such, support for the agressor, since he knows that when the attacked country hits back, it will be equally condemned by you.

When one equally condemns the means--violence--without caring about the aims and ustice of the cause--genocide or self-defense, protection of liberty or establishment of dictatorship--one is treating evil and good sides equally, which is the same is supporting evil. And, no, to say "how do we know which side is which?" is a cop-out.
 
Last edited:
Just to make it VERY clear - I do NOT intend to find "excuses" for people who perpetrate atrocities like genocide, etc. EVER. There are no excuses to be had in such cases - let the legal penalties apply, certainly. I'm certainly no peacenik.

I'm not indifferent to the situation in the Middle East. Not choosing a side is NOT indifference. Think of it more as an "umpire" position - vitally interested in the outcome, but determined to see fairness, even if it means pulling brawling players apart.

Nor do I not care about the aims and justice of causes. It's just that I do not tie violence to them as an indispensable means of achieving them. Have you ever asked why a few Palestinians are advocating throwing Israel into the sea? Is the answer really "because every Palestinian wants to see Israel obliterated"? I suspect not...

Do I think Israel should be able to defend itself? Certainly, up to a point. And I'm sure the Israeli military know very well what that point is. Do I think that wholesale obliteration of Israel by force is "an answer"? No, I don't. And I suspect the vast majority of Palestinians think the same thing.

So I do think there is room for compromise on both sides, with mutual benefit to both. Do I have the answer? Nope! But someone who is prepared to thrash this out sensibly just might...
 
very interesting exchange

Between zep and skeptic, that really was a most useful and impressive outcome of this thread.

I don't support ANYBODY'S violence as a political mechanism. -- zep
Click to expand...
Zep, I like that. It's catchy.

to say "how do we know which side is which?" is a cop-out. -- skep
Click to expand...
Skeptic, I like that, too. It puts things into perspective.

========================
And after those two positive notes: Here's the latest story from another Slow News Day In Israel
Katan Joins Benayoun On West Ham Unitedhttp://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/665898.html
 
Skeptic said:
They seem not to grasp the very simple, very obvious truth: that the Palestinian goal, openly stated numerous times, is the destruction of israel and the annihilation/expulsion of the jews.
Click to expand...
What percentage of Palestinians subscribe to such views?

(NB: this question is not rhetorical and I should really like to know.)
 
Do you feel that the use of weapons (violence) is the way to resolve the conflict?

67.6% said "YES" (in 2004) that they feel violence is the proper way to deal with Israel. (this poll was after the death of Arafat)

http://home.birzeit.edu/dsp/opinionpolls/list.html#2k5


Lots of other information is to be gathered in that website, it is all fascinating, and you will see many things which offer insights to the Palestinians.
 
Zep said:
I'm not indifferent to the situation in the Middle East. Not choosing a side is NOT indifference. Think of it more as an "umpire" position - vitally interested in the outcome, but determined to see fairness, even if it means pulling brawling players apart.
Click to expand...
What would make the conflict fair?
 
How about this --

Give nuclear weapons to the Palestinians.

That should do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom