zzz_pt
Premium
- 8,188
- Porto living in Hamburg
- zzz_pt
Okay if that helps you convey your point then do that, what ever works to help you divulge what you think is best do that instead and then we can move to a faster understanding rather than the circular back and forth. Also drop the attitude it's a debate don't take it personally, I know you feel invested to this for some reason, but at the end of the day you arguing here is only going to influence the people who may read and agree or disagree to come up with a stance. No where do I say everything you post is irrelevant but it's not impartial.
For the religion part it would seem one group is far more fundamentalist about it than the other.
There are fundamentalists in both sides.
No there isn't and if you believe a citation on my impression of the context of how you present information and view on this subject then I think you don't understand how citations work. You claimed you are for the Palestinian people first and foremost, correct? So if this is your claim as you've said then that strikes me as some humanitarian who wants the violence to stop (which I'm sure we all do). When you decided to take up the gauntlet and demonize Israel more so than anything else you're telling us you have an understanding of this complex world view and it's led you to believe that Israel are mere bullies raining fire and hell down on simple people with nothing but stones.
Correct.
Also, read this:
http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/18618/hrw-whitewashes-israel-the-law-supports-hamas_some
Also when you state things on how if your child died you'd join Hamas, as if that's the correct way to combat either an accident or casualty of war. So you'd support the terror extreme that your supposed world view tells you to hate. A group with suicide bombers and plans to commit acts that if achieved would do far more damage than anything that has been done in the region...?
Or and since you'll claim source material for this I've taken the liberty to post the quotes here that allowed me to formulate these bits of text.
Joining Hamas: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/israel-attacks-gaza.268128/page-14#post-9887861
In this same post you also reference the cheering of Israeli's which up to that point had been shown from Twitter feeds. So there is where my twitter comment comes from.
There's a difference bettwen being in agreement with Hamas "goals" or "mission" and joining them simply to defend my people or have revenge after losing a child or an entire family. If you can't grasp that, I don't know how to explain it better. If you don't have an army in Gaza to join and defend you people, who would you join? Is it more clear now? Hamas, for better or for worse is the only "armed" force in the region who somoene could join to fight for their people. Israel has the army, you don't need to join milicias or "terrorist groups".
Sure, violence is "never the solution". I would like to see your solution if your city was being occupied and stangled by other country, bombing and shelling nonstop and you hadn't an army to join but only a milicia or a group. Ah, and you couldn't leave that city. I bet you wouldn't resigne if someone of your family was killed. I know I wouldn't. That's what Israel wants. Complete surrender from palestinian people and control over their lives.
Plus, the cheering is a fact. It's been happening since the beginning of the conflict. It's not made up.
I still maintain that oppinion, of course.
I gave you a source. Your last quote are you now going to claim it is a misquote?
I'll give it again:
Here are these: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/israel-attacks-gaza.268128/page-19#post-9900667
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/israel-attacks-gaza.268128/page-24#post-9911115 (this one where you claim that all media is bias, but though it biased the selection you picked that was questioned is fine...)
I've taken efforts to avoid and only use material that isn't of Islamic and Jewish backed sites, but because an author in the states may be Jewish (many are), they're disbarred from being used too?
That video really doesn't prove anything. Have you seen in the the past few days the video that IDF sent to UN claiming as evidence that rockets were fired next to the hospital they bombed? UN asked for the video to analyse it and reported after watching it that those claims were false. No one was sending rockets in the area.
Well, if you bring stuff as your source from IDF sites or Israeli official media, you can be sure I'll say they're biased. I've said that all media is biased yes. But you can separate the factual from the BS. Also, if you post as your source Hamas's stuff, my reaction will be the same. What I've posted in that particular post was backed up by evidences and reports. It's not the same as posting IDF or Hamas's propaganda or contradictions.
You can post whatever you can.
I never made a false assumption, nor did I ever say you had a twitter account. What I said was you were willing to use social media posts as a source of news. Social media is an easy place to pass off false information more so than supposed bias journalist claim you made. Like the Slate article that I posted whose author was of Jewish back ground and to you automatically means he has an investment/bias in Israel. However, that's just an easy way to not argue the subject. I mean there are Jews that openly don't have an interest in what Israel is doing as you've shown, do they have to be fully opposed to Israel before writing an article like the one I posted from Slate?
Are you sure that was what you've said? I'll quote you:
What I said you used which you did post or liked or followed up on was a twitter snip of a reporter claiming that the image was of Israeli's sitting at a out door drive in watching bombs drop and cheering.
This is false... Again. I didn't post or liked or followed any twitter about the cheering isralis. BTW, was that false? Since the beggining, several jounralists have been reporting that fact. Is not a claim. It's a fact.
So you didn't post the Instagram image of a supposed Israeli sniper targeting a supposed innocent Palestinian as another method to demonize Israel? That's social media. Or how about suggesting Facebook news.
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/israel-attacks-gaza.268128/page-21#post-9903131
So since you didn't find anything about what you claimed, you change it to this? It's a link to "The Guardian". A news report about a Israeli IDF soldier that posted a photograph with a "palestinian child in crosshairs of rifle".
So, The Guardian's articles are the same as Twitter's posts. Nice try to change what you've said to something completely different.
Surely you're not going to be that shallow, the degree as I expressed and most have is different but as @Danoff puts it best and others is basically the same.
Are you talking about Danoff's post about the "Hypotheticals"? Right. See my response to that here. https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/israel-attacks-gaza.268128/page-34#post-9935502
Let's not talk about miningless hypotheticas. I was asking you what leads you to think what is happening in Gaza is "the same" as in Israel? In reality.
It's ironic because @TenEightyOne made a post on the religious thread that you agreed with by liking that talked about what I just said in my last post. I've given my impression of how you act and hardly any outright "this is who you are verbatim" examples. You gave something that would require something definitive like an outside source and you refused on the grounds of I supposedly don't do it so you shouldn't. Even though I just said if I reference something (not your character) that seems to need a reference then ask.
Well, why should I follow your "advice" about the AUP if I see you breaking it?
First off the Slate article I gave had examples that were reported in here to some extents like for example the fact that Israel warned in advance for citizens to leave areas (re-read page 13). However, you already seemed to not believe this early on well before I posted the article.
Saying every media is biased is not the same as saying every source is BS. I've recognized that RT TV is very biased. But that doesn't mean everything they do is BS. There are people working there properly and even challenging RT TV's "bias". If you think that saying every media has a biased position is the same as saying that everything they do is "yellow paper", something isn't right. I've said that we (readers) have to be the ones chosing what's good journalism from what's "yellow paper".
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/israel-attacks-gaza.268128/page-15#post-9892112, post from that user after I agree where inane but that one post at least has realism to it as journalist have been reporting. So either you disagree with the idea they are warning for areas that may come under attack or they're not.
The only thing that makes sense in that post is the fact that Israel sent warnings. The rest is nonsense. And even the fact of the warnings is not absolute. They didn't warn a lot of people. BTW, they didn't warn UN refugee centers, hospitals, schools, the market, etc.
You continuely seem to believe or give the impression that Jewish attacks or "terror" have been going on long before Hamas came about. However, Hamas has shown a great disdain toward Israel as far back as the 80s as I can find.
http://www.adl.org/anti-semitism/muslim-arab-world/c/hamas-in-their-own-words.html
What about these quotes?
http://monabaker.com/quotes.htm
What torture and oppression? You'd think that a nation that holds such diversity in their own borders would do the same to others there and not just in Gaza. And why is it only Gaza if the idea of Palestinians is so infuriating why isn't the West Bank being treated like Gaza right now? Or is that two months from now and then back to Gaza?
Are you that naive or are you playing games?
http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/
What it seems to me is that Israel is just one big bully to you and thus no one really starts anything with Israel it's just a fairy tale concocted by them to the international stage. I mean let's ignore Hamas doctrine that calls to kill Israelis at all cost even if it means the death of it's own
Or this:
Or this:
And many others like this.
Or this: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/netanyahu-palestinian-state.html
Or this: http://electronicintifada.net/blogs...parliament-deputy-speakers-gaza-genocide-plan
Or this: http://news.antiwar.com/2014/07/28/...ict-regulation-of-antiwar-protests-in-europe/
I read all your post hence why I decided to debate you because of the inconsistencies even though you now claim to disregard Hamas for the disservice they've done to their people. Also if it isn't an excuse then what is it, a hypothetical that seems like an excuse?
Inconsistencies? From the beggining I'm supporting the palestinians and I'm against Israel's actions. I'm also against the religious extremism of Hamas. If we could erase both Hamas and Israeli gov from the map, we would still be confronted with Israel occupying palestinian land. We would still be watching an illegal wall segragating 2 people based on their religion. We would still have a blockade in Gaza, etc.
Sure you can because they are, and anyone is threatened or under threat when someone decided to lob 2500+ rockets at them. Show me a person who hasn't condemned both Hamas and IDF? We all have as far as I see, we just don't accept this idea that only painting Israel as the bad guy and then saying "Hamas strategy is simply stupid" when pressure is right. Why not post condemning both constantly?
The rockets again? You really need to read this: http://www.salon.com/2014/07/28/deb...ehind_israeli_and_palestinian_talking_points/
http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/18618/hrw-whitewashes-israel-the-law-supports-hamas_some
No I didn't, and if you can show me from the guns thread as I've done here like you've asked that would be great.
I won't post anything more in the guns threat. It's useless. People there don't want to listen to anyone and none of their arguments. It's pretty much the same as a religious subjetc. We'll see in the future wich solution is the best. Until then, I'm ok not discussing it because I live in a safe country.
Uh no...I think that kids and people dying in general is a state of war (and quite sad), and that telling the world how many more civilians died on either side doesn't help the political debate be impartial. The reason is because people tend to play into emotion rather than rational intrigue. Also who isn't showing their support of Palestinian people?
Doesn't help de "debate"? What do you want to debate when you see 5 civilian casualties in Israel and over 1200 in the other (not counting Hamas fighters) +330 being children (and there are more among the rubble)? You can try to debate and racionalize this in every way you want. In the end you'll be grabing an empty sack. You would still think that having 5 to +1200 civilian casualtins in each side is exactly the same as 5 to 5.
Also, this might be my last post in this thread in the next few weeks. I'm leaving in vacation and if I have any time to participate, it will be with short posts.
I went to the city library grab 2 books about Israel/Palestine to read while in holidays. I want to learn more about this. And from what I've already seen, I guess mt position will be strengthened.
Last edited:
