Massacre in Gaza: Part 2

118 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Wed, 2008-12-31 20:01

blairz

Ohara, I respect your attempt to see all sides of this story. So often the conflict in Israel -Palestine inspire many on both sides of the issue to respond with hatred, intemperate language and violence. That said I have to agree with many here that the arguments made in the article you cited are fallacious. They seek to obscure the very real issue of Israel's disregard for civilian life and further seek to exagerate the danger posed to Isralis. For your consideration I'll answer with this website

http://palestinian.ning.com/forum/topics/the-other-side-of-the-story

Here you will see clear evidence of the indiscrimate terror waged by Idf.

You will see many children killed, maimed and displaced by this increasingly cynical regime. The right of a state to defend itself is mitigated by the level or volume of the threat posed to it.

Peace

Wed, 2008-12-31 20:14

#103

Unionist

Welcome to the New Elbbab - where filthy trolls like punch drunk can survive for a few moments, while the rest of humanity celebrates the advent of year which will mean victories for the victims of oppression.

Someone tell punch drunk, please, that while capital punishment has been banned in our fair land, suicide has been decriminalized.

Wed, 2008-12-31 20:47

#104

Unionist

Whatever. Happy New Year, punch drunk, and please don't forget to drop dead (it's legal!!!) before midnight.

Wed, 2008-12-31 20:48

#105

punch drunk

Unionist wrote:

Welcome to the New Elbbab - where filthy trolls like punch drunk can survive for a few moments, while the rest of humanity celebrates the advent of year which will mean victories for the victims of oppression.

Someone tell punch drunk, please, that while capital punishment has been banned in our fair land, suicide has been decriminalized.

Parroting politically correct mantra/falsehoods no matter how many times they are repeated do not make them any less false.

This tread is a disgusting example of the absence of any real discussion (save an except for blairz' s post above) just cheer leading of revisionism.

Wed, 2008-12-31 20:51

#106

punch drunk

More from Mr Glavin on point:

UPDATE: Here's a video
of the demonstration against the "Israeli terrorist state apartheid
regime" in Vancouver today (to their credit, these people appear to
have at least abandoned the fraudulent claim to be part of an
"anti-war" movement). About half way through, the camera turns to my
good comrade Jonathon Narvey among a small group of pro-Israel
supporters, across the street. He explains the difference between his
side and the other in a single, plain statement: "We want peace for
both the Israelis and the Palestinians. They don't."

Edmund Standing notices a certain pattern:
"The continuing attacks on Israel from those who claim to favour
civilised values are based on a perverse inversion of reality. When
theocratic devotees of a Jihadist death cult launch murderous attacks
on Israeli civilians, the fashionable approach is to ‘understand’ these
criminal actions. And when Israel, in a very limited way, fights back
against this violence being directed at its civilian population it
encounters a firestorm of criticism and abuse, being accused of
‘racism’ and painted as a bloodthirsty monster that delights in
’slaughtering’ and ‘massacring’ women and children."

For a properly progressive critique
of Israel's current strategy, you can always rely on Ami Isseroff: "The
Israeli action is justified and long overdue. But the real question is,
'What can it accomplish?'" That's the question Lisa Goldman has been
asking, and the answer she settles on is not exactly encouraging:
"I am against the attacks on Gaza because they won’t work. Neither air
force bombardments nor a ground invasion will stop the Qassams. In
fact, the IAF and IDF attacks will make life more dangerous and
disturbing for the residents of Sderot and the western Negev, because
Hamas and Islamic Jihad will respond by increasing their rocket
barrages."

We will see. For the time being, there is only one proper response: Solidarity with Palestinians and Israelis. For the time being, this will require acceptance of being in a minority position on the left.

Wed, 2008-12-31 22:23

#110

Coyote

It is always interesting to see who will place themselves on the side of the powerful against the powerless, and lecture others. these same people lectured us about the fascist saddam, and praised bush. history, and any semblance of moral seriousness, will be judge them appropriately.

Meanwhile, all respect and solidarity to Israelis like Gideon Levy, standing up against this irresponsible and brutal attack on the population of gaza.

Wed, 2008-12-31 22:28

#111

Unionist

Yeah, and Terry Glavin (aka punch drunk) has 4.5 more hours to do the right thing before a new, healthy year dawns.

ETA: Pacific Standard Time. Plus one second.

Wed, 2008-12-31 22:34

#112

Cueball

punch drunk wrote:

More from Mr Glavin on point:

UPDATE: Here's a video of the demonstration against the "Israeli terrorist state apartheid regime" in Vancouver today (to their credit, these people appear to have at least abandoned the fraudulent claim to be part of an "anti-war" movement). About half way through, the camera turns to my good comrade Jonathon Narvey among a small group of pro-Israel supporters, across the street. He explains the difference between his side and the other in a single, plain statement: "We want peace for both the Israelis and the Palestinians. They don't."

Edmund Standing notices a certain pattern: "The continuing attacks on Israel from those who claim to favour civilised values are based on a perverse inversion of reality. When theocratic devotees of a Jihadist death cult launch murderous attacks on Israeli civilians, the fashionable approach is to ‘understand’ these criminal actions. And when Israel, in a very limited way, fights back against this violence being directed at its civilian population it encounters a firestorm of criticism and abuse, being accused of ‘racism’ and painted as a bloodthirsty monster that delights in ’slaughtering’ and ‘massacring’ women and children."

For a properly progressive critique of Israel's current strategy, you can always rely on Ami Isseroff: "The Israeli action is justified and long overdue. But the real question is, 'What can it accomplish?'" That's the question Lisa Goldman has been asking, and the answer she settles on is not exactly encouraging: "I am against the attacks on Gaza because they won’t work. Neither air force bombardments nor a ground invasion will stop the Qassams. In fact, the IAF and IDF attacks will make life more dangerous and disturbing for the residents of Sderot and the western Negev, because Hamas and Islamic Jihad will respond by increasing their rocket barrages."

We will see. For the time being, there is only one proper response: Solidarity with Palestinians and Israelis. For the time being, this will require acceptance of being in a minority position on the left.

Only a total idiot would put the onus of culpability upon the party which has killed 5 people over the last 5 days, when its opposite number has killed 80 times that amount. As if the few casualties cause by the Jewish resistance in the Warsaw Ghetto was justified the actions of the Wehrmacht.

Yer just a fuckin useless demagogue and loser.

Thu, 2009-01-01 00:50

#113

Hoodeet

It's pretty revolting to see the kind of ad hominem attacks that
appear on this site. Telling people to drop dead, insulting
people who disagree with you, repeating lines of argument like mantras
- all this doesn't seem to have much rationality or open-mindedness.

Thu, 2009-01-01 00:58

#114

Unionist

Hoodeet wrote:

It's pretty revolting to see the kind of ad hominem attacks that
appear on this site.

You should look up the meaning of "ad hominem". It's a logical fallacy, whereby you attack what someone is saying based on some personal quality of theirs, rather than dealing with the substance. Like, "she's just a Liberal/NDPer/Catholic/etc., what she's saying is nonsense", to oversimplify a bit.

When, however, a person says something extremely offensive - such as justifying mass murder - and you berate the person [i]because of the substance of what they have said[/i] - it is the very opposite of ad hominem. Here, you are attacking the person because of what they said, not who they are.

You may not like it, but kindly characterize it properly.

Also, when arguments are repeated, it is sometimes because the truth tends to be forgotten, or grow hazy, unless reinforced by repetition and application to new circumstances. To never repeat oneself is either to remain silent, or to tell lies.

Finally, when someone comes onto this particular site, literally out of nowhere, and in their very first posts ever, starts defending and justifying the Israeli murderous carpet-bombing of Gaza... then to invite that person to "drop dead" is far more civilized, polite, and restrained than what this prick's heroes are doing to the people of Gaza.

Happy New Year, Hoodeet.

Thu, 2009-01-01 01:23

#115

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Quote:
As if the few casualties cause by the Jewish resistance in the Warsaw Ghetto was justified the actions of the Wehrmacht.

Butit did ... for the Wehrmact.

Did you know the Canadian government, last month, finally, is recognizing its moral cowardice of 1939 when it turned away a boat load of Jewish refugees? It's true. It announced this the same month it engaged in the very same brand of moral cowardice when Israel launched a "war" againt a ghettoized civilian population. Some things never change.