Corrie vs. Caterpillar -- Redux.

Cleon said:
Cope. Play games with someone else.
Click to expand...


Games? I genuinely want to know if you believe she supported the armed fight against Israel or not, and whether you consider the people that actually carry out such attacks terrorists.

It's a simple question. Everything I've seen suggests that she was completely blinded by hate (and sympathy for the perceived victim, if you want.)
 
jsiv said:
It's a simple question. Everything I've seen suggests that she was completely blinded by hate (and sympathy for the perceived victim, if you want.)
Click to expand...


I think you mis-typed "everything I've decided to believe."

The fact is, there is no evidence whatsoever that Rachel supported terrorists or terrorism. None. Zero. Zilch. Zip. Any "evidence" to that effect inevitably involves making broad inferences based on email snippets or photo snapshots without any context. Inevitably, you reach the conclusion that that makes it easiest for you to condemn/dismiss Rachel and continue your glorification of the Israeli state.

To people like you and webfusion, any word of sympathy for the Palestinians or failure to issue a foaming-at-the-mouth blanket condemnation of any and all violence against Israelis (whether directed against the IDF or civilians) is "supporting terrorism."

Meanwhile, of course, you don't feel particularly obligated to issue even a mild condemnation of Israel's attacks on civilians, Israel's routine oppression of the Palestinian population, Israel's transformation of entire towns into open-air prisons, Israel's routine imprisonment of Palestinian activists (whether "terrorists" or not) without trial, Israel's systematic land theft to build "settlements" that are limited to people of one particular ethnicity.

Yes, this is a "game"--calling it a "double standard" is an insult to double-standards everywhere.

And no, I'm not playing anymore. Cope.
 
Cleon said:
The fact is, there is no evidence whatsoever that Rachel supported terrorists or terrorism. None. Zero. Zilch. Zip. Any "evidence" to that effect inevitably involves making broad inferences based on email snippets or photo snapshots without any context.
Click to expand...


No, it involves footage and interviews with her and other ISM members and descriptions (which granted, are less reliable) of their actions over the years.


Cleon said:
Inevitably, you reach the conclusion that that makes it easiest for you to condemn/dismiss Rachel and continue your glorification of the Israeli state.
Click to expand...


I do not condemn Rachel. I think she was a victim -- but not of Israel.


Cleon said:
To people like you and webfusion, any word of sympathy for the Palestinians
Click to expand...


No. I have never said that.


Cleon said:
or failure to issue a foaming-at-the-mouth blanket condemnation of any and all violence against Israelis (whether directed against the IDF or civilians) is "supporting terrorism."
Click to expand...


You're right, I do think everyone should condemn the violence that is not done in direct self defense. And no, I do not consider firing rockets into Israel as self defense.


Cleon said:
Meanwhile, of course, you don't feel particularly obligated to issue even a mild condemnation of Israel's attacks on civilians,
Click to expand...


I will not condemn Israel for any deaths of any civilians caught in the cross-fire between the IDF and terrorists, no. I consider them the terrorist's responsibility.

Bombing civilian neighborhoods just for the heck of it, that I do condemn. Same with instances that involve severe recklessness.


Cleon said:
Israel's routine oppression of the Palestinian population
Click to expand...


While I don't like it, I simply consider it a consequence of palestinian action. Israelis are only human, and will like everyone else respond when pushed too far.


Cleon said:
Israel's transformation of entire towns into open-air prisons, Israel's routine imprisonment of Palestinian activists (whether "terrorists" or not) without trial,
Click to expand...


Your claim. But no, I do not support the imprisonment of anyone without a fair trial. Within reasonable time.


Cleon said:
Israel's systematic land theft to build "settlements" that are limited to people of one particular ethnicity.
Click to expand...


I do not support any of the settlement programs.


Thanks for at least answering half my question though.
 
The ISM is upfront about its support for the Palestinian “right” to engage in terrorism! The members of ISM in Israel are not innocents -- they are direct participants in confronting IDF combat units in their missions.

I have no problem whatsoever with ISM members being arrested, or even killed, when they confront armed troops. The fact that they have not lost more of their members is a testimony to the patience and training of IDF officers who avoid just shooting them, even while risking their own troops' safety.

The ISM do as much as possible to roil the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and want Israel dismantled. Don't be fooled by rhetoric of "peace" by ISM activists. They are, in fact, a war movement led by the PLO following the credo of world revolution. They are human shields for terrorists.

That is the bottom line.
 
webfusion said:
The ISM is upfront about its support for the Palestinian “right” to engage in terrorism!
Click to expand...

The ISM is not Stalin's Communist Party with a central "line" that everyone adheres to.

The ISM's primary function is to facilitate western activists' participation in non-violent resistance. People who participate in this activity have a range of political ideas and beliefs. Some are pacifist, some are not.

Sorry to disappoint.

I have no problem whatsoever with ISM members being arrested, or even killed,
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm well aware.
 
Cleon, it is quite dishonest of you to take my quote and truncate it.

I specifically said: "I have no problem whatsoever with ISM members being arrested, or even killed, when they confront armed troops."

You quoted me back, and intentionally left out my qualifier, which resulted in the meaning of my statement being altered.

The ISM's primary function is to facilitate western activists' participation in non-violent resistance.
Click to expand...

B.S.
The primary function of the ISM is to lend support to terrorists.
 
webfusion said:
Cleon, it is quite dishonest of you to take my quote and truncate it.
Click to expand...

Not at all. You've made it very clear that you will cheer the IDF on no matter who they kill as long as they are considered Enemies of the State.

B.S.
The primary function of the ISM is to lend support to terrorists.
Click to expand...

See, if you're going to say stuff like that, you really have no business whining about my being "dishonest."
 
webfusion said:
Cleon, they are fully in solidarity with the terrorist groups.
Click to expand...

To you, of course they are. Because in your little world, anyone who decries Israel's war crimes and human rights abuses is "fully in solidarity with the terrorist groups."
 
Cleon said:
To you, of course they are. Because in your little world, anyone who decries Israel's war crimes and human rights abuses is "fully in solidarity with the terrorist groups."
Click to expand...


Straw.

Strawman.jpg
 
Cleon said:
To you, of course they are. Because in your little world, anyone who decries Israel's war crimes and human rights abuses is "fully in solidarity with the terrorist groups."
Click to expand...
Not to get confused and pedantic on you, Cleon, but Israel is at war with whom? With which nation state is Israel at war? The war crimes may have been intended hyperbole, but in all honesty, I will ask:

Do you feel (or have evidence) that Israel is at war with someone in particular?

DR
 
webfusion said:
To call the Israelis "terrorists", while we're acting in self-defense consistently and exclusively, simple defies all logic.
Click to expand...
If every group in history that claimed to act exclusively in self-defence had actually acted exclusively in self-defence they would not have had anything to defend against, because there would have been no war in all of human history.
 
Earthborn said:
If every group in history that claimed to act exclusively in self-defence had actually acted exclusively in self-defence they would not have had anything to defend against, because there would have been no war in all of human history.
Click to expand...
That's not true. Plenty of wars have begun without the appeal to self defense. Julius Caesar comes to mind, with the old "we need to add this to the Empire" deal, and King Phillip II on his way to annex England in 1588.

"Because it's my right to have that country."

Now, since the UN began, or since maybe the Metternich System was put in place, you might be on to something.

Of course, that doesn't include all those cool wars in India and Asia, or Japan's annexing Manchuria.

Such a busy bunch, those conquerors.

DR
 
The Fool said:
Pedantically speaking......Syria?
Click to expand...

I have never seen any claims of war crimes, nor any protest from ISM, (or any other group which seeks to pillory Israel) in regards to the existing state of war with Syria.

Have you seen evidence of war crimes that Israel committed against Syria?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom