Arafat was assassinated!!!

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Read what I said: I said your opening post. That you retract it later is not my problem.

You think it's rational to expect me to pretend to hold a position I've retracted?

Why would you expect that?

Originally posted by CFLarsen
I'm not the one who needs to explain things here. It's your thread. What is your point with it?

Well, no you don't have to explain anything, but if you want to stear the conversation in a specific direction then it's up to you to do so. I don't know what point you want to make about the nationality of the assassins, so I can't possibly say what you want me to.

You see a significance here that I don't. Rather than continue to harass me because I don't understand what you're getting at, why not just explain yourself?

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Arafat died of AIDS

(BTW, the fool will have a tough time showing a record of the continuing clashes and 'gunbattles' between HAMAS and the PA forces --- because there aren't any. HAMAS and Islamic Jihad continue to display their armed strength at public rallies and marches in Gaza daily. The "PA Police" is hesitant to even intervene against unarmed crowds of youths who are trying to face-off against the IDF at the evacuated settlements.)

Yeah, that's what I thought, but the Fool seems to think there have been a lot of gun battles between the PA and Hamas.

I look forward to seeing what he bases that on, though!

 

[003998]

Which is a tu quoque argument. Which means it's a logical fallacy to claim that your father's experience as a mafia don disqualifies him from offering an opinion on a life of crime, but it's perfectly valid if you want to prove your father is a hypocrite.

So, doesn´t this mean, that my mafia don dad (i.e. the US) loses his moral high ground to judge my actions, because he is a hypocrite?
Just as Orwel postulated initially:

But now seriously... Considering the very brutal history of most western countries, I think we don't have the moral high-ground necessary to go around judging someone else's violent behaviour to decide who deserves to have a nation or not...

 

[Mycroft]

So, doesn´t this mean, that my mafia don dad (i.e. the US) loses his moral high ground to judge my actions, because he is a hypocrite?
Just as Orwel postulated initially:

No.

His morality is a separate issue from his being correct on if a life of crime is right for you.

Think of it this way:

Suppose I'm a smoker and I tell you smoking is bad for you.

You can use a tu quoque argument to prove that I'm a hypocrite, and you will be correct.

But I'm still right about smoking being bad for your. Your tu quoque argument is a logical fallacy if you try to prove me wrong on that point.

I don't need moral high-ground to warn you of the dangers of smoking any more than your Mafia Dad needs moral high-ground to warn you against a life of crime.

And let's be honest, we don't listen to paragons of moral virtue any more than we listen to anyone else, do we?

 

[CFLarsen]

I don't know what point you want to make about the nationality of the assassins, so I can't possibly say what you want me to.

I am not trying to get you to say anything. I am asking you what your point was in opening this thread.

 

[003998]

No.

His morality is a separate issue from his being correct on if a life of crime is right for you.

Think of it this way:

Suppose I'm a smoker and I tell you smoking is bad for you.

You can use a tu quoque argument to prove that I'm a hypocrite, and you will be correct.

But I'm still right about smoking being bad for your. Your tu quoque argument is a logical fallacy if you try to prove me wrong on that point.

I don't need moral high-ground to warn you of the dangers of smoking any more than your Mafia Dad needs moral high-ground to warn you against a life of crime.

That´s yet another analogy that doesn´t apply to the question. The main difference being that smoking IS bad for you.
Being brutal and using force and mass-murder to archieve your goals, isn´t.
We´re dealing with a question of morality, not of utility. So, moral highground becomes an issue and has been forfeited by the smoker/mafia don/genocidal Western societies.

I will give you that this is quite a bit of simplification, but it´s not an argument as easily dismissed as you did with your initial analogy.

 

[zenith-nadir]

Abbas Vows to Hunt Down Ex-Chief's Killers - Wed Sep 7,10:35 PM ET

Wow...he "vows"...Meanwhile while the promises and vows are made for the media armed Palestinian militants march on the streets with their weapons... like they do every day:

image here AFP Photo - Thursday Sep 8, 4:05 AM ET - "Two residents of the southern Gaza Strip Palestinian town of Rafah watch armed masked militants from the Fatah movement marching past their front door."

image here AP Photo - Wed Sep 7, 1:57 PM ET - "A masked Palestinian militant stands next to a group of children following a rally by supporters of the Fatah movement celebrating the Israeli pullout from Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip."

That is why you can't take Abbas or the PA seriously. Armed militants storm the house of Moussa Arafat, murder him in the street and yet the very SAME DAY and NEXT DAY Palestinian militants from Abbas's OWN PARTY are masked and parading with their weapons - next to children - on Palestinian streets.

There's your new state.

 

[The Fool]

Re: Re: Arafat died of AIDS

Yeah, that's what I thought, but the Fool seems to think there have been a lot of gun battles between the PA and Hamas.

I look forward to seeing what he bases that on, though!

you want a lot of gunfights?
10 minutes googling the words hamas PA and clash...these are from the first page or two..

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/cfr/stories/hamas/

Hamas and the PA sometimes cooperate, sometimes compete, and sometimes clash

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4701775.stm

The Gaza Strip has endured days of tension - witnessing some of the worst violence between Palestinians for years.
The powerful militant movement Hamas has clashed repeatedly with the government's security forces.
There have been efforts bring the crisis to a halt. But it may be days before we know if they have been successful because sporadic clashes have continued

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?

itemNo=182804&contrassID=1&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=0
At least 10 people were wounded Wednesday in clashes between Hamas supporters and Palestinian security forces in the Gaza Strip. Hospital sources said that seven Palesitnian policemen were among the wounded

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3115187,00.html

The clashes were the latest in a series of battles that have taken place in Gaza since the weekend


Webfusion says
"BTW, the fool will have a tough time showing a record of the continuing clashes and 'gunbattles' between HAMAS and the PA forces --- because there aren't any"


"clashed repeatedly", "sporadic clashes have continued", "series of battles"...there aren't any?

And who assasinated Arafat? The Easter bunny?


Mycroft says:
think it's your sarcasm in place of argument that sets a negative tone for the Politics forum that contrubutes to the number of complaints it generates. I'm not saying you're the only problem, but you're certainly a part of the problem.
I take your point...now what was the point of your opening sentence of this thread again? Was its intention to elevate the standards? I can only hope but maybe tomorrows Palestinian thread will have a more productive outcome...

 

[Mycroft]

I am not trying to get you to say anything. I am asking you what your point was in opening this thread.

You focused on a specific aspect that I hadn't raised. That indicates that you found significance where I did not.

What was your point in focusing on nationality? What do you think it indicates that's worthy of comment?

Oh, and my point in opening this thread, I think, is self-eplanatory. Even so, unlike you, I'll explain the self-explanatory because you asked.

I opened the thread to introduce this news item for discussion.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: Re: Arafat died of AIDS

you want a lot of gunfights?
10 minutes googling the words hamas PA and clash...these are from the first page or two..

And the links that still work all refer to the mid-July event.

If an event is reported by more than one source, that doesn't make it more than one event.

 

[Mycroft]

That´s yet another analogy that doesn´t apply to the question. The main difference being that smoking IS bad for you.

Which makes it a perfect analogy. Smoking is just as bad for you if I smoke or not. That's why a tu quoque argument is a logical fallacy.

In a similar way, assassination is just as wrong (or just as justifiable, depending on your point of view) no matter what the history of the person (or nation) making the observation.

 

[CFLarsen]

You focused on a specific aspect that I hadn't raised. That indicates that you found significance where I did not.

What was your point in focusing on nationality? What do you think it indicates that's worthy of comment?

Oh, and my point in opening this thread, I think, is self-eplanatory. Even so, unlike you, I'll explain the self-explanatory because you asked.

I opened the thread to introduce this news item for discussion.

And you came to the conclusion that the Palestinians should have a state. A conclusion you later retracted.

So, what is your current stance re. this assassination?

 

[Mycroft]

And you came to the conclusion that the Palestinians should have a state. A conclusion you later retracted.

So, what is your current stance re. this assassination?

You still haven't said why you think his nationality is important. Will you?

 

[The Fool]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Arafat died of AIDS

And the links that still work all refer to the mid-July event.

If an event is reported by more than one source, that doesn't make it more than one event.

yes because that is the latest series of gunfights..as I said...I only went back a short time. Do you really want to nail yourself to the position that the PA and Hamas don't clash?

when you read the words ""clashed repeatedly", "sporadic clashes have continued", "series of battles"... does a single event seem an appropriate description to you?


Anyway.....you even totally dismiss any and all clashes because you simple state that the PA has "not started". How do you explain the dead bodies to the families...died doing something that the PA have not yet started to do?

Sorry Mycroft, you really should put "not started" on your retraction list.

 

[webfusion]

record of "continuing" clashes (in the present tense)

the fool tried to deflect the argument of Mycroft by sarcastically saying:
"and you are right...there have been no gunfights since the last gunfight..."

And then he proceeds to offer links to support his claim (?) of ongoing current actions by the PA against HAMAS recently.

Let's see if his 'evidence' holds up to scrutiny:

Ynet report -- (07.19.05, 18:18)
This is the report of the main clash which took place back in July (the event that had the RPG attack, the burning of the PA armored vehicle, and the shootings).

And his linked BBC article covers the same July events!

This is not a new clash, this is the same specific one that Mycroft alluded to already, as the single famous gunbattle which has questionable significance in the grand scheme of things.

Also, the Ha'Aretz report is from 2002 actually (Last update - 09:22 04/07/2002), so it cannot possibly be used to support TF's claim that gunbattles are now taking place, or a series of battles is underway, or even that sporadic clashes continue...

It is somewhat disingenious of TF to throw those old reports back at me in an effort to 'prove' that PA-HAMAS gunbattles are in the news headlines these days (August 2005), which is what I challenged him to show.

Yeah, HAMAS and other radical groups are at odds with the PA, that is not in dispute. However, what is Abbas saying and doing in the current environment? He is not confronting them at all. In fact, he is trying very hard to avoid confronting them!
He knows quite well that there is a bullet already loaded into a gun somewhere with HIS name on it.

 

[003998]

Which makes it a perfect analogy. Smoking is just as bad for you if I smoke or not. That's why a tu quoque argument is a logical fallacy.

In a similar way, assassination is just as wrong (or just as justifiable, depending on your point of view) no matter what the history of the person (or nation) making the observation.

Repetition doesn´t make your argument any better.
The wrongness or rightness of an action can never be determined without context. In a society of thiefs, you cannot single someone out and say: "Look, he´s a thief. He doesn´t deserve to be free."
Neither can you single out the Palestines and decide that THEIR wrongdoings should preclude them from their own state when that rule doesn´t apply to anyone else.

 

[rikzilla]

False analogy. Taking the US as an example, the guy isn´t in prison. He´s sitting on top of a throne made of indian bones and taste´s the wine served by black slaves.

So your question should read: "If a mafia don with lots of money and every luxury imaginable told you crime wasn´t worth ist, would you listen?"

Wow....you say the US then use the imagery of imperialism and genocide. I can't say I disagree. Our history is indeed soaked in the blood of the American Indian and the sweat of the slave. But that is our history...not our present day. Just as Hitler no longer rules Germany; the murdering white European colonists who believed in "Manifest Destiny" no longer do their thing here either. They are dead and gone. We can (and should) strive to be better people.

So, must we Americans remain silent about genocide in the world since we are the decendants of the murderers of the Indians? If so then who will speak out about the wrongs done in this world? You? If you are German then you are likely related to Nazis! The French? What about the depredations of Napoleon? The Spanish? They are guilty of supporting the Inquisition! The British? Hell, they're worse than the Americans...they are the original Americans! My own family traces it's roots back to a German farmer named Joseph Belcher who owned a large part of Bertie county, NC back in the 1720's. He may or may not have owned slaves...we're not certain. It's likely he did though. So should I be prohibited from speaking out against slavery?

If the past bad deeds of nations prohibited them from ever speaking out about present bad deeds then how can any of us ever speak out about anything?

The Japanese also proffered this argument prior to their attack on Pearl Harbour. The US had objected to the Japanese subjugation of China and Korea. The Japanese responded that the US had their own imperialist backyard in America and had no right to tell the Japanese that they could not do the same in Asia. But it's a nonsense tu quoque argument. The time to try and speak out or otherwise prevent genocide or slavery is when we have evidence those events are going on. Carping about some weird sense of national historical hypocrisy is just weird. In the final analysis there is no national entity that has never done some awful thing in the past....except perhaps the young state of Israel.

So I'd say both your and Mycroft's analogies are flawed.

-z

 

[The Fool]

Re: record of "continuing" clashes (in the present tense)

Yeah, HAMAS and other radical groups are at odds with the PA, that is not in dispute.

and you also say.. "BTW, the fool will have a tough time showing a record of the continuing clashes and 'gunbattles' between HAMAS and the PA forces --- because there aren't any"

you asked for continuing clashes...I provide descriptions of events that state "clashed repeatedly", "sporadic clashes have continued", "series of battles"......

now I get this from you..."It is somewhat disingenious of TF to throw those old reports back at me in an effort to 'prove' that PA-HAMAS gunbattles are in the news headlines these days (August 2005), which is what I challenged him to show"

It is disingenuous of me to not have the psycic ability to predict that you will dismiss any events to have happened before august? As I said to mycroft...there have been no gunfights since the last gunfight and no mondays since last monday. Obviously there has been no gunshots now for a long enough time for you to declare the fighting over.... There have also been no suicide bombings since the last one....when can we declare the suicide bombings over?

 

[webfusion]

C-O-N-T-E-X-T

The context of our discussion is that the Palestinians continue to parade and posture their armed men, while pronouncing their intent to persist in violent terror methods, despite the decisions of the PA leadership to cease that.

As for the current gunbattles, this paragraph was slipped into the middle of an article discussing the release today of Moussa Arafat's son, who was kidnapped during the assassination action at his father's home:
(it lends support to TF, in a way, although it is unclear who is fighting whom and why).

• Over the past few weeks, severe clashes have taken place in Khan Yunis between different Fatah factions, involving large-scale shooting and the use of hand grenades and machine guns. The various factions in the city, such as the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, the Fatah Hawks, the Popular Resistance Committees and the military arms of Hamas and Islamic Jihad have all taken part in the clashes, and all the groups hold daily demonstrations in the streets. The fear is that a funeral procession will be used by supporters of Moussa Arafat and opposition groups to embarrass the PA and its police forces, who are preparing for the Israeli IDF withdrawal about to take place.
  

Israel has said that HAMAS will be allowed into the politcal process under two conditions:

1.They disband their military wing and lay down weapons
and
2. renounce their Charter which calls for the elimination of Israel.

Sound familiar? It should.
This was the basis for the Palestinian National Authority (PLO) taking control during the Oslo phase.

Now, here we are in a critical junction, where the roadmap indicates a cessation of terrorism is incumbent on the part of the Palestinians. They can choose to go that route, or not. That is what we are discussing, TF.

All these factions are merely different sides of the same coin. That is what Mycroft, Z-N, myself and others here are indicating is the actual case. The outstanding time (which you still seem to think represents some sort of continuing process) when they clashed back in July was not because of any PA decision to go after HAMAS! NO. It all started because HAMAS thought the PA was being too lenient with "Israeli collaborators" and they tried to mob-lynch them, only to find the PA guards determined to maintain the rule of law and order, which HAMAS promptly shredded with their obscene brand of defiant street violence.


(see: Beirut)

 

[CFLarsen]

You still haven't said why you think his nationality is important. Will you?

Answer the question, please:

What is your current stance re. this assassination?

You opened this thread to talk about it. So talk. Explain what you think.