• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.travelindustrydeals.com/news/4447

World's Worst Tourists: Israelis Might Top The List

clearly, this is motivated by anti-Semitism.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/2138252.stm

yup..its definitely anti-Semitism.
The title of the first article is clearly anti-Israel as the source they worked from clearly said that Brits were the worst, according to the survey.

It isn't anti-Semitism as the tourists could have been Jewish, Arab, or any other ethnicity. There aren't only Jews in Israel.
 
The title of the first article is clearly anti-Israel as the source they worked from clearly said that Brits were the worst, according to the survey.

It isn't anti-Semitism as the tourists could have been Jewish, Arab, or any other ethnicity. There aren't only Jews in Israel.

the great majority of Israelis are Jews, so clearly saying that Israelis are the worst tourists is anti-Semitism.
 
the great majority of Israelis are Jews, so clearly saying that Israelis are the worst tourists is anti-Semitism.
If you say so.

It could be, since it was just a survey and not a scientific study, but there is not enough evidence provided that would indicate anti-Semitism.
 
If you say so.

It could be, since it was just a survey and not a scientific study, but there is not enough evidence provided that would indicate anti-Semitism.

right, because the targets are Jews, we need a mountain of evidence & a Supreme Court decision to prove the clear bigotry.
 
This thread just gets dumber and dumber. Now you're discussing whether a survey about Israeli tourists being ruder than other tourists is evidence of anti-Semitism?

Look, the majority of Israelis who travel abroad, particularly the most visible ones tend to be young adults who are just out of the army and do a lot of travelling for a few years. They probably do tend to be loud and obnoxious, just as British, Australian and Irish yobs with a bit of money and cheap tickets to Spain, Thailand and a few other places also make arses of themselves. It's not nice and I don't condone it but this is hardly relevant to the discussion. Rather it is just a trolling attempt by Thunderpants.

Now, I did earlier post an article that I thought was useful in that it did seek to find a middle ground between the polarized viewpoints of the discussion, here:

http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/columnists/47451/killing-children-and-peace

Any thoughts on that or would you rather post strawmen about how the UN is racist against black people or how some random tourism survey is anti-Israeli?
 
Oh look! The BBC has an article by Gavin Esler on the Eichmann Trial:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12912527

Hannah Arendt, who was very critical of Israel and was thought of sometimes (erroneously, in my opinion) to be too sympathetic to Eichmann and scathing of the Zionists, called Eichmann's trial a show trial. But she points out one of the "show trial"'s purposes here.

Eichmann in Jerusalem, p.12-13

In one respect, Mr Ben-Gurion's expectations for the trial were not altogether disappointed; it did indeed become an important instrument for ferreting out other Nazis and criminals, but not in the Arab countries, which had openly offered refuge to hundreds of them. The Grand Mufti's connections with the Nazis during the war were no secret; he had hoped they would help him in some "final solution" in the Near East. Hence, newspapers in Damascus and Beirut, in Cairo and Jordan, did not hide any sympathy for Eichmann or their regret that he "had not finished the job"; a broadcast from Cairo even injected a slightly anti-German note into its comments, complaining that there was not "a single incident in which one German plane flew over one Jewish settlement and dropped one bomb on it throughout the last world war." That Arab nationalists have been in sympathy with Nazism is notorious, their reasons are obvious, and neither Ben-Gurion nor this trial was needed "to ferret them out"; they were never in hiding.
 
this thread is about the Israel/Palestine conflict and related issues, not the Holocaust.

If this wasn't from the man who gave us posts about rotten Israel outrageously letting in non-Jews to the country, about how bad rotten Israeli tourists are and about how Obama hates Israel for the obvious reason that it's rotten I might take your objections seriously and then I would tell you to read the quote from Arendt's book on the Eichmann trial which shows the two things are not completely unconnected.

Alternatively, feel free to put me on ignore.
 
If this wasn't from the man who gave us posts about rotten Israel outrageously letting in non-Jews to the country,

who is this guy? surely its not I, for I have made no such statements.

oh...you must be very confused regarding my posts regarding the Law of Return, condemning Israel's refusal to allow in 100% ethnic Jews who choose to believe in Jesus and Jews who converted to Orthodox Judaism under unpopular Rabbis and Synagogues....while having the chutzpah to claim that the Law of Return is in reaction to the Nuremberg Laws and is there to protect "all" Jews from persecution.

how in the world you unfortunately misinterpreted that to mean condemning Israel for allowing in non-Jewish immigrants, truly is beyond me.
 
who is this guy? surely its not I, for I have made no such statements.

oh...you must be very confused regarding my posts regarding the Law of Return, condemning Israel's refusal to allow in 100% ethnic Jews who choose to believe in Jesus and Jews who converted to Orthodox Judaism under unpopular Rabbis and Synagogues....while having the chutzpah to claim that the Law of Return is in reaction to the Nuremberg Laws and is there to protect "all" Jews from persecution.
how in the world you unfortunately misinterpreted that to mean condemning Israel for allowing in non-Jewish immigrants, truly is beyond me.

Show me where I had such chutzpah?
 
You mean that you can't back up your assertion? Okay, a smily works just as well.

:o there is no smiley for "oy vey", but this will have to do.

don't worry, my friend. tomorrow I shall explain it all to you, and you will understand.
 
Edited by kmortis: 
Removed personal remarks


As for the OP, Goldstone denies that he would be retracting his report (Goldstone denies intention to retract UN report on Gaza op. Somewhat confused as to what the real story is here.

Not that it really matters....

And on a sidenote, Ashton considers Gilo a settlement (here. Interesting. Jerusalem and the WB are two different matters not to be melded into one classification. Someone buy these muppets a map and the history to go along with it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ooops....wrong definition highlighted. We are discussing guilt, the legal term. Not feeling guilty because you ate the last cookie.

Goldstone did not and could not establish guilt however you will continue to claim he could and did.

Nah, you were the one prattling on about legal guilt found in a court of law. I was just pointing out there is moral guilt that can be established as well.

I didn't think I'd have to explain that?
 
investigation was not formed on the basis of that bias, Goldstone refused to do that. You will continue to ignore this fact and claim he did.

You have not been reading this thread. Go back up a few posts and do some homework.
 
on the balance of the evidence before him. why do i keep having to point this out to you? It makes a difference.

And I tire of asking you what you mean when you say things like 'balance of the evidence before him.'

What do you refer to when you say evidence in this context?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom