RE: Pardalis: "anti-semitic garbage"

[Oliver]

RE: Pardalis: "anti-semitic garbage"

I'm a little puzzled by your careless attitude here Oliver. Do you realize what this article you took that quote from is? Did you even care to read the rest? Do you realize that it is filled with anti-semitic garbage?

Do you understand what the expression "useful idiot" means?

Pardalis opinion is that this time-table of american involvement in the Middle-East is nothing but "Anti-Semetic Garbage".

So is there anyone in here who is able to debunk these "Facts"?

http://rwor.org/a/v23/1120-29/1125/timeline.htm

Please refer to the Time-Table itself because I will not reply to attacks against the messenger.

Thank you in advance,
Oliver

 

[Pardalis]

Did you see what rwor.org is about? (OK, I'll give you a hint, since you seem clueless of your sources: "Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party,USA")

Do you understand the expression "useful idiot", Oliver?

 

[quixotecoyote]

According to that source, Israel launched the Six Day War, the US controlled Iran's refugee policy from 1973-1975, Kuwait was doing serious harm to Iraq justifying the invasion, the 1993 missile attacks in Iraq were only due to the assassination attempt on Bush Sr.

Brief scan.

 

[Oliver]

Did you see what rwor.org is about? (OK, I'll give you a hint, since you seem clueless of your sources: "Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party,USA")

Do you understand the expression "useful idiot", Oliver?

Well debunk it. I don't care if the Data was recovered from
Satan himself. Proof it to be wrong - if you are honest.

 

[Pardalis]

Well debunk it.

I can't, I don't have the necessary knowledge to do so, but this article seems way too biased in my opinion, given where it comes from and the words it uses. It seems to cherry pick events that go within their ideology and they give them a one-sided spin and interpretation. I would have to research in depth before I made up my mind about it.

The remark about anti-semitism was about Chillzero's article she posted in her warning to you, about your breach of rule 4. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2735136&postcount=55

My question is, did you ever check these facts yourself or did you just swallow this article as the gospel truth?

 

[quixotecoyote]

Ding dong.

Hello?

June 1967: With U.S. weapons and support, Israeli military launches the so-called "Six Day War,"

 

[Oliver]

Ding dong.

Hello?

Ding Dong?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Day_War
" In June 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack on Egypt's airforce fearing an imminent invasion by Egypt.[1] "

http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/1998/issue4/jv2n4a7.html
As a result of these events, U.S. military assistance and arms sales increased significantly,3 and the IDF was increasingly equipped with and dependent on American weapons and technology. In 1967, France had imposed an embargo on sales to Israel, so America became Israel's sole source of platforms and major weapons systems.

I can't, I don't have the necessary knowledge to do so, but this article seems way too biased in my opinion, given where it comes from and the words it uses. It seems to cherry pick events that go within their ideology and they give them a one-sided spin and interpretation. I would have to research in depth before I made up my mind about it.

The remark about anti-semitism was about Chillzero's article she posted in her warning to you, about your breach of rule 4.

My question is, did you ever check these facts yourself or did you just swallow this article as the gospel truth?

I can bomb you with similar articles and also know many of these points from many sources. So even if I didn't check all points yet, I have no reason to believe they're "made up" - as you tried to portray falsely.

 

[Pardalis]

So even if I didn't check all points yet, I have no reason to believe they're "made up" - as you tried to portray falsely.

It's from the Revolutionary Communist Party, that's reason enough to be skeptical about it. These people usually have an agenda.

A reputable source of objective information would have to be unbiased, unafiliated and apolitical.

 

[Oliver]

It's from the Revolutionary Communist Party, that's reason enough to be skeptical about it. These people usually have an agenda.

A reputable source of objective information would have to be unbiased, unafiliated and apolitical.

So you're basically saying: No, Frank said it - and I never believe Frank.
If Magret would have told me the same, I would believe her.

Basically you're trying to dodge:

You don't like the source and therefore everything said is a lie.
Even your enemies are capable to tell the truth from time to time, Goury.
Even if you don't like this fact.

 

[quixotecoyote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Day_War
" In June 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack on Egypt's airforce fearing an imminent invasion by Egypt.[1] "

Honesty check, lets see what the previous sentence was to the one you quoted.

In the months before June 1967, Egypt expelled the United Nations Emergency Force from the Sinai Peninsula, increased its military activity near the border, blockaded the Straits of Tiran to Israeli ships, and called for unified Arab action against Israel.

If say, Mexico blockaded the Mississippi river entrance while massing troops along the border and announcing an attack, that would be launching a war.

I'm done with your consistent dishonesty.

 

[Schneibster]

Simple, easy, obvious: search for "Zionist" in the text. That's the end of the conversation, Oliver.

 

[Pardalis]

So you're basically saying: No, Frank said it - and I never believe Frank.
If Magret would have told me the same, I would believe her.

That's not it at all. This is an article from a political movement's journal, with a clear "revolutionary" agenda. I believe my skepticism is well founded.

I'm not dismissing the article off hand, I'm just being very skeptical of its objectivity.

Are you being skeptical?

 

[Oliver]

Simple, easy, obvious: search for "Zionist" in the text. That's the end of the conversation, Oliver.

That's pure ignorance on your side. Zionism is also part of the hate against the western world from "Terrorists point of View".

To ignore it is also a dangerous ignorance, isn't it?

 

[Oliver]

That's not it at all. This is an article from a political movement's journal, with a clear "revolutionary" agenda. I believe my skepticism is well founded.

I'm not dismissing the article off hand, I'm just being very skeptical of its objectivity.

Are you being skeptical?

I know that many parts are facts. No matter if Hitler, Mother Theresa or Stalin posted them.

Your critical thinking lacks just because you don't like the source - and quite frankly:
I would expect this behavior from Truthers: "I don't believe you because your source is the Government".

 

[Schneibster]

Oliver, there are legitimate reasons for making reference to "Zionists." If you see it used to refer to the entire state of Israel, there is no need for further investigation. There were and are Zionists; the entire state of Israel is not Zionist.

You are a German, Oliver. You should know this. If you don't agree with "never again," I don't want to talk to you any more.

 

[Oliver]

Oliver, there are legitimate reasons for making reference to "Zionists." If you see it used to refer to the entire state of Israel, there is no need for further investigation. There were and are Zionists; the entire state of Israel is not Zionist.

You are a German, Oliver. You should know this. If you don't agree with "never again," I don't want to talk to you any more.

I fully agree with "Never again". Nevertheless - I think the so called Zionists play a major role in Anti-American propaganda. You really can't dismiss this fact if you ever listened to Osama's speeches in the past.

 

[Pardalis]

I know that many parts are facts. No matter if Hitler or Stalin posted them. Your critical thinking lacks just because you don't like the source - and quite frankly - I would expect this behavior from Truthers: "I don't believe you because your source is the Government".

Again, your missing my point. You're willing to post just about anything that goes along the lines of your mindset, regardless of the source. To me, that's completely irresponsible and the antithesis of critical thinking. You even admitted yourself that you didn't even bother to crosscheck these facts. And you're asking me to check them for you?

 

[Oliver]

Again, your missing my point. You're willing to post just about anything that goes along the lines of your mindset, regardless of the source. To me, that's completely irresponsible and the antithesis of critical thinking. You even admitted yourself that you didn't even bother to cross-check these facts. And you're asking me to check them for you?

I'm pointing out F.A.C.T.S
I KNOW THEY ARE NOT WELCOMED. BUT THEY ARE FACTS NEVERTHELESS.
I also challenged you to disproof them: Your answer: "I don't know but I know I don't like the source."

 

[Pardalis]

Do your homework and crosscheck these facts yourself.

I know I will.

 

[Oliver]

Do your homework and crosscheck these facts yourself.

I know I will.

I did. And I will be glad to see you debunking at least 50% of the "Anti-American propaganda".