General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[Giz]

The problem is you guys characterize "support" too broadly and infer that it means the same kind of support a "card carrying" member of Hamas would have.

You basically take deviations from your conception of Hamas as automatically meaning the polar opposite of your position: you are die-hard opponents, so people like bikerdruid must be die-hard supporters.

So people who say things like: well they are the elected government, or that Israel should maybe consider negotiating a deal with Hamas - are construed as "supporters" of Hamas.

This is you key line, used by all three of you, throughout this thread.

"Why do you 'support' Hamas?"

This then let's you bring out the heavy artillery:

X "supports" Hamas, ergo, X supports everything Hamas has ever done, ergo, X loves it when innocent jews die and hates jews.

This is a perfect example of confirmation bias at work - enabled by simplified reductions of your opponent's views, and perhaps, some sort of underlying desire to be arguing against vile people who support murder.

That last bit is a bit of mind-reading I know, but given the eagerness with which such slander is employed by all three of you I have to assume there's something you enjoy about battling Evil, so you see Evil everywhere. Even in innocents like bikerdruid.

That's because Hamas are so extremist.

If I meet someone who says that they support Democrats or Republicans then I may have a broad idea of where they stand in general but, given the "broad church" and rather moderate nature of the parties, I would expect to find areas where they go "off-message".

On the other hand, if I meet someone who says they support Nazis, KKK, Hamas… then I tend to think that there is something about the extremist position that they like. After all, when you get down to it… there aren't many fascists supporting neo-nazi parties just because they'd like the trains to run on time.


People who want to support Palestinians without supporting the murder of innocents should just say that, instead of saying that they support Hamas.

(If you were to want to communicate that "I support Germany regaining ethincally German land and not paying any more Versailles reperations but I do not support war and genocide"… then you shouldn't say "I support Nazis", or then justify it with "they won a plurality of the vote - so respect them!". Because people will get the wrong idea about you.)

 

[WildCat]

I'll give you one:

P.É. Trudeau expropriated hundreds of families from their homes to build an airport that is now vacant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montréal-Mirabel_International_Airport#Expropriation

The same P.É Trudeau you admire so much.

Ouch!

 

[Skeptic]

Apparently none.

Which sounds about right to some of the xenophobes here.

Xenophobes is the wrong word, since they apply this principle only to Jewish immigrants. Another word applies.

 

[Pardalis]

they were paid a fair market value for their homes.

Spoken like a true capitalist...

And BTW, they were not paid adequately. They were exiled out of their lands (good fertile lands, BTW) for a white elephant. They didn't have a say, they didn't have a choice.

 

[Skeptic]

Well, I guess I will come out of the closet.

I support the KKK and the American Nazi party, and that group of lunatics in the basement who think all Black people are actually shape-shifting alien lizards and must be physically exterminated.

Oh, but I'm not a die-hard supporter, you see. I just support their economic and social policies, you see...

...me? Racist? What gave you that idea?

 

[WildCat]

Spoken like a true capitalist...

It's amazing how even a hard-core communist like bikerdruid is suddenly a crusader for private property rights... just so long as there's a "bash Israel" angle.

 

[Skeptic]

I dunno. He also is for private property rights when it's his property we're talking about. It's only other people's private property that should be sacrificed for the ideal of the communist world revolution.

I mean, you don't see him actually moving to Cuba or giving up his bank account, now do you?

 

[bikerdruid]

I dunno. He also is for private property rights when it's his property we're talking about. It's only other people's private property that should be sacrificed for the ideal of the communist world revolution.

I mean, you don't see him actually moving to Cuba or giving up his bank account, now do you?

i have acknowledged, in other threads, that i admit freely i live on lands traditionally owned by the beaver indians.
i do not claim ownership of the land on which i live, only stewardship.

 

[WildCat]

i have acknowledged, in other threads, that i admit freely i live on lands traditionally owned by the beaver indians.
i do not claim ownership of the land on which i live, only stewardship.

So what happens to it when you die? Does it revert to the Beaver Indians?

 

[bikerdruid]

So what happens to it when you die? Does it revert to the Beaver Indians?

revert to?
it will always be traditional beaver land.
it has been for at least 10,000 years that we know of.
i don't know who will be steward after i die.

 

[IDB87]

revert to?
it will always be traditional beaver land.
it has been for at least 10,000 years that we know of.
i don't know who will be steward after i die.

Who appointed you steward?

 

[bikerdruid]

Who appointed you steward?

the beaver people, during our long association.
i helped them fight a land claim issue several years ago.
i did buy the land years ago, from the previous 'owner'. (an absentee land lord)
and i plan to pass it on to my step-daughter, in keeping with beaver custom.

 

[WildCat]

the beaver people, during our long association.
i helped them fight a land claim issue several years ago.
i did buy the land years ago, from the previous 'owner'. (an absentee land lord)
and i plan to pass it on to my step-daughter, in keeping with beaver custom.

So it's not Beaver Indian land, it's land you bought.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Johnny....Its wrong because its not right. Its hard for me to tell you "why" you are wrong.

OK, let's say I am wrong. how did you determine that before I even presented my evidence? And BTW you of course misrepresented me by saying that I said the land belongs to the Jews. I said it was promised to them originally. Unfortunately before the negotiations could be finished the Jews were attacked
in the Hebron massacres in 1929 and the Arab revolt in 1936. Oh wait, that's more than 40 years ago and before resolution 181 so it must not count.

But of course even after 1947 when the UN then gave half of that 25% to the Arabs it still wasn't enough and they attacked again. Now they have about 15% of the original area of Palestine mandated by...oh wait don't want to give up a source before you tell me how you determined I was wrong without any evidence.

EDIT - All you had to say was that you cannot accept my argument without me first providing evidence, which is a valid argument since for all you know I could very well be wrong.

 

[Giz]

and i plan to pass it on to my step-daughter, in keeping with beaver custom.

Surely, as you are "just a steward", you should pass it to the tribe upon your death and let them decide how to use it?

 

[bikerdruid]

Surely, as you are "just a steward", you should pass it to the tribe upon your death and let them decide how to use it?

in beaver custom, a home passes to family.
she has already been acknowledged.

 

[bikerdruid]

So it's not Beaver Indian land, it's land you bought.

it is always traditional beaver land.
i freely acknowledge that.
my deed is merely paper.
they have lived here for 10,000 years, that we know of.

 

[Pardalis]

You never answered my question.

 

[WildCat]

it is always traditional beaver land.
i freely acknowledge that.
my deed is merely paper.
they have lived here for 10,000 years, that we know of.

Your deed is a legal document that trumps all else, and I really doubt the Beaver Indians lived there for 10,000 years. The evidence is overwhelming that Indians migrated far and wide over the millenia, where they were 200 years ago isn't necessarily where they were 500 years ago. Strong Indian tribes routinely took land and resources from weaker ones.

The tribe for which my state is named went extinct at the hands of other Indians... in fact once around 1635 or so 500 Illini men traveled up to Wisconsin to bring food to the Winnebago tribe, which was starving. So pleased with this gesture of kindness were the Winnebagos they held a big dance in honor of their rescuers. During this dance the Winnebagos surprised the Illini by killing them all, and to push the festivities up to 11 they roasted and ate their bodies.

Ah, the good old days!

 

[Praktik]

That's because Hamas are so extremist.

If I meet someone who says that they support Democrats or Republicans then I may have a broad idea of where they stand in general but, given the "broad church" and rather moderate nature of the parties, I would expect to find areas where they go "off-message".

On the other hand, if I meet someone who says they support Nazis, KKK, Hamas… then I tend to think that there is something about the extremist position that they like. After all, when you get down to it… there aren't many fascists supporting neo-nazi parties just because they'd like the trains to run on time.


People who want to support Palestinians without supporting the murder of innocents should just say that, instead of saying that they support Hamas.

(If you were to want to communicate that "I support Germany regaining ethincally German land and not paying any more Versailles reperations but I do not support war and genocide"… then you shouldn't say "I support Nazis", or then justify it with "they won a plurality of the vote - so respect them!". Because people will get the wrong idea about you.)

Hey - you know what - maybe I have a partner for peace after all! I appreciate the effort here to engage more directly and in good faith.

I can see better your angle here, but I still don't understand why this doesn't have you and others labelling bikerdruid as a confused person whose words could be construed as indirectly supportive of the murder of innocents. This is often skipped in favour of active, conscious support for murder.

And it's that kind of hyperbole that gets my goat!

Now, I still have issues with the useful idiot meme and find that it's something of a conversation stopper (I think such thoughts are better kept to oneself as true useful idiots will not even understand the insult)... and I'm not entirely sure I can subscribe to a binary understanding of a complex entity, but this at least is a start..