Helen Thomas resigns over remarks

[Pardalis]

Skeptigirl, when you say "impractical", does that mean that you agree with her, but don't think it could be done (the mass deportation of the Jews from Israel)?

Please explain.

 

[Pardalis]

I don't think it is realistic to expel the Jews from Israel.

You don't think it's "realistic" but nonetheless agree with the principle? You think it's a good idea, but not practical?

 

[Skeptic]

It's fine to criticize Thomas. What isn't fine is the lopsided criticism of Thomas by the same press that claims Thomas' lack of neutrality is a problem for reporters.

What if she claimed all Black people should "go back to Africa"? Or all, say, Latinos "go back to Mexico"? I think you'd then agree the condemnation would not be "lopsided" just because it would be universally critical, and that this is hardly a sign of "hypocrisy" from the press. So why is it that only when it comes to Jews "going back to Europe" is it "lopsided" to criticize without seeing the good part of this sage advice?

A curious rule that applies only to Jews, I guess. Discussing their deportation and destruction is not racism, it's "speaking one's mind" and "being honest".

Oh, and by the way, I'm confused. My grandfather was hounded out of Germany because he was told to "go back to Palestine". Could Ms. Thomas and the Nazis please straighten it out and decide where Jews really belong?

Because as we all know, Jews are not allowed to live anywhere from where they really belong, if somebody objects. It's another one of those curious rules that applies only to Jews.

 

[Fnord]

Israel should get out of Palestine and the Jews should go back to Germany and Poland is the gist of what veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas said on video.

I understand the situation, but I fail to see a problem.

If anyone has the right to free speech, it's a reporter.

 

[Skeptic]

I don't think it is realistic to expel the Jews from Israel.

I don't think it is realistic to kick out all the Blacks in the USA back to Africa.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You don't think saying Jews should go back to Europe is outrageous? Mass deportation is not outrageous? What would be an outrageous statement in your view?

Also, what does "impractical" mean, in this context?

Thanks.

There are many countries in the world today where people are living in homes and on land confiscated from other people. There's a point where it is not practical for these invaders to give back their stolen land. Is there a simple solution to these situations? No.

But why only address one side of the problem? Is it outrageous to have had your land confiscated and now the world speaks of that land as if the confiscators own it and it is outrageous for you to say the land was stolen?

 

[Pardalis]

I often disagree with skeptigirl on many things, but I always thought she was at least rational and decent.

I never, never expected that I would have to put her in the same category as MaGZ, 9/11Investigator or E.J. Armstrong.

I'm truly astonished by this revelation.

 

[Skeptic]

If anyone has the right to free speech, it's a reporter.

Who says she doesn't have a right to free speech? She just doesn't have a right to not be criticized for her free speech. Nobody is putting her in jail. She simply lost a job because her free speech showed her to be a disgusting idiot without any shred of objectivity.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You don't think it's "realistic" but nonetheless agree with the principle? You think it's a good idea, but not practical?

Now you are totally distorting what I said.

I understand Helen's point. I understand how the Palestinians feel about the creation of Israel carving it out of their country without their consent.

That's a far cry from agreeing with the principle. I find the principle totally impractical and not worth putting on the table as a potential solution.

 

[WildCat]

I often disagree with skeptigirl on many things, but I always thought she was at least rational and decent.

I never, never expected that I would have to put her in the same category as MaGZ, 9/11Investigator or E.J. Armstrong.

I'm truly astonished by this revelation.

Anti-semitism is out in the open again. And the world economy is in the toilet... not a good combination.

 

[Pardalis]

Is it outrageous to have had your land confiscated and now the world speaks of that land as if the confiscators own it and it is outrageous for you to say the land was stolen?

Is Israel a sovereign state recognized by the United Nations?

Yes or no?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Who says she doesn't have a right to free speech? She just doesn't have a right to not be criticized for her free speech. Nobody is putting her in jail. She simply lost a job because her free speech showed her to be a disgusting idiot without any shred of objectivity.

So siding with Israel is objective and siding with the Palestinians is not being objective?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Is Israel a sovereign state recognized by the United Nations?

Yes or no?

What is your point? Are you claiming the UN had the right to confiscate land from one group and give it to another?

 

[Pardalis]

Yes or no?

 

[WildCat]

I understand how the Palestinians feel about the creation of Israel carving it out of their country without their consent.

Did they feel the same way about the other countries created at about the same time without their consent, such as Jordan and Syria?

Hmmmm... what could it be about Israel that got them so upset? I can't think of anything...

 

[Skeptic]

I often disagree with skeptigirl on many things, but I always thought she was at least rational and decent.

I never, never expected that I would have to put her in the same category as MaGZ, 9/11Investigator or E.J. Armstrong.

I'm truly astonished by this revelation.

Why are you so astonished? "Israel must be destroyed" is a de facto dogma in many, many so-called "progressive" circles. It's much wider spread than you think, Pardalis. If you think Israel is an evil colonialist European enterprise, of course you also think it should be destroyed. They believe A, so B follows.

Again, why are you surprised? We are speaking about the same people who supported Mao, Ho Chi Minh, and Che Guevara, to name a few. If we were now in the 1960s, it's very likely that the same people who now so "objectively" want Israel destroyed and support the "freedom fighters" of Hamas & co. would be "objectively" supporting the USSR's and Mao's great achievements and humanity.

Support of mass murderers who killed millions and whose goal was to destroy other countries is hardly something new for the "progressives". It's rather a pre-requirement, proof that one is "bravely speaking one's mind" and not taken in by "bourgeois imperialist anti-socialist propaganda", you see.

 

[Pardalis]

That's a far cry from agreeing with the principle. I find the principle totally impractical and not worth putting on the table as a potential solution.

So you actually considered the idea?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I often disagree with skeptigirl on many things, but I always thought she was at least rational and decent.

I never, never expected that I would have to put her in the same category as MaGZ, 9/11Investigator or E.J. Armstrong.

I'm truly astonished by this revelation.

Often disagree? Ha! We disagree on almost everything political.

I mostly respect your difference of opinion, but not when you resort to this kind of ad hom instead of sticking to the actual debate issues. I'm not familiar with the examples you are comparing me to, but I can guess they are irrational posters.

Why is it irrational to have empathy for the Palestinians? Have you ever even considered their perspective? Ever look at a map of Palestine before 1947? Ever notice how densely populated the area was before the Zionists moved in to supposedly claim unoccupied lands?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So you actually considered the idea?

Are you lacking basic vocabulary here? Understanding a position is the same as agreeing with it in your dictionary? It's not the same in mine.

 

[WildCat]

Why is it irrational to have empathy for the Palestinians? Have you ever even considered their perspective? Ever look at a map of Palestine before 1947? Ever notice how densely populated the area was before the Zionists moved in to supposedly claim unoccupied lands?

Why aren't they upset about Jordan and Syria?